Tertia Pars
Lecture 121: Christ's Incorruptibility, Duration in the Tomb, and Descent to Hell

Transcript
================================================================================

The body of Christ was incinerated, right, or reduced to ashes, I should say, in the sepulchre. It's incinerated, it means burnt, right? It means reduced to ashes, huh? To the third death one proceeds, it seems that the body of Christ became ashes in the tomb. For just as death is the punishment of the sin of the first parent, so also this return to ashes. For it is said to the first man after sin, you are dust, and the dust you shall return, as it is said in Genesis 3. But Christ underwent death, that he might liberate us from death. Therefore, his body ought to have been turned to dust, that he might liberate us from dust, huh? Moreover, the body of Christ is of the same nature with our bodies. But our bodies, immediately after death, begin to dissolve, right, and are disposed to putrefaction, because the natural heat being exhaled on, and there comes an extraneous heat, which causes the putrefaction. Therefore, it seems that this would happen to the body of Christ. Moreover, as has been said, Christ wished to be buried, that he might give men the hope of rising, even from their tombs, right? Therefore, you ought also to have undergone incineration, or rejection to dust, that he might give the hope of rising to those turned to dust, right? After they have done that. But against us is what is said in Psalm 15, he will not give his Holy One to see, what? Corruption. Which Damascene expounds in the third book about the corruption, which is by resolving something to its elements, right? Answer, it was not suitable for the body of Christ to be, what? Corrupted, yeah, putified, or in any way to return to ashes, because the putrefaction of any body arises from the infirmity of the nature of that body, which is not able anymore to contain that body as something one. But the death of Christ, as has been said above, ought not to be with the, what? The infirmity of nature, lest it be believed that it was not, what? Voluntary, right? And therefore, not from sickness, but from a passion that he wished to die, to which he spontaneously, what? Offered himself, right? And therefore, Christ, lest death be ascribed to the weakness of his nature, did not wish his, what, body in any way, to be putrefied or corrupted in any way, but to showing the power, but for the showing of his divine power, he wished his body to remain, what? Uncorrupted, huh? When the Christian says, huh, living other men, huh, to those who, what? Worked strenuously, I guess. Their own deeds, what? Redent, they? Shined forth in their life. Yeah. But these perishing, they perish, but in Christ is the holy contrary. For before his crucifixion, all things are, what? A weakness. That he might be crucified, all things. But as, when he is crucified, all things are made more, what? Clear. That we might know him, not to be a pure man who has been crucified, huh? So he spoke out there, into the cross. Likewise, not decrypting in there. Now, to the first, it should be said, that Christ, since he was not subject to sin, nor is he subject to death, nor to, what? Turning to dust. In our, nevertheless, voluntarily sustained death on account of our salvation, for the reasons given above. If, however, his body was putrefied or resolved, it would be more indeterminate to human salvation, because it would not be believed in him to be a, what? Divine power, right? Whence, from his person, it is said in Psalm 29, what usefulness in my blood when I descend to, what? Corruption. As if, if my body putrefies, there is lost the usefulness of the blood that I have shed, huh? To the second, it should be said that the body of Christ, as regards the condition of a sufferable, able to suffer about nature, was, what? Able to be putrefied. Although, not as regards the merit of putrefaction, which is sin. But the divine power, preserved or reserved or kept from the body of Christ from putrefaction, just as it raised him from, what? Death, huh? And he says it's enough that he rose from the dead, right, to give us help. To the third, it should be said that Christ, from the tomb, resurrected by the divine power, which is not limited by any, it's not confined by any limits. And therefore, that he rose from the, what, sepulcher, is a sufficient argument that men would be, what, raised up by divine power, not only from the sepulcher, but also from, what, a dust, huh? So I expect a man to go through. Come to the last article here in this question. To the fourth, one goes forth thus. Thus, it seems that Christ is not in the sepulcher only one day and two nights, huh? For, as is said in Matthew 12, just as Jonah was in the stomach, I guess, of the whale, three days and three nights, right? So the Son of Man would be in the, what, heart of the earth for three days and three nights. But in the heart of the earth, he was, he was existing in the, what, tomb. Therefore, he was not only in the tomb one day and two nights, huh? Moreover, Gregory says in the Easter homily, I guess, huh? That just as Samson took away, I guess, in the middle of the night, the gates of, what, Gaza? So Christ, in the middle of the night, taking the gates of, what, hell? He rose, right? But after he rose, he was not in sepulcher. Therefore, he was not in sepulcher for two whole, what, nights. Moreover, through death, the light of Christ overcame darkness. But night pertains to darkness, day to light. Therefore, it is more suitable that the body of Christ be in sepulcher two days and one night than one day and two nights. But again, this is what Augustine says in the fourth book about the Trinity. That from the evening of the burial to the early morning of the resurrection, there are, what, 36 hours, right, huh? That is, um, a whole night with a whole day and a whole, what, okay? The answer should be said that the time in which Christ remained in the tomb represents the effect of, what, his death, huh? For it is said above that through the death of Christ we are freed from a twofold death, to wit, from the death of the soul. For it is said above that through the death of Christ we are freed from a twofold death of Christ we are freed from a twofold death of Christ we are freed from a twofold death of Christ we are freed from a twofold death of Christ we are freed from a twofold death of Christ we are freed from a twofold death of Christ we are freed from a twofold death of Christ we are freed from a twofold death of Christ we are freed from a twofold death of Christ we are freed from a twofold death of Christ we are freed from a twofold death of Christ we are freed from a twofold death of Christ we are freed from a twofold death of Christ we are freed from a twofold death of Christ we are freed from a twofold death of Christ we are freed from a twofold death of Christ we are freed from a twofold death of Christ we are freed from a twofold death of Christ we are freed from a twofold death of Christ we are freed from a twofold death of Christ we are freed from a twofold death of Christ and from the death of the body. And this is signified through the two nights by which Christ remained in the, what? Tomb, huh? His death, because it was not coming about from sin, but was undertaken from charity, does not have the notion of a night, but a day. And therefore it is signified through the whole day in which Christ was in the, what? The sepulcher. And thus it was suitable that Christ, one day and two nights, was in the, what? Tomb, huh? Now what about the first part there, huh? Was in there three days and three nights, see? Well, it's going to be what figure of speech? Cousin, isn't it? I'm told you, see. No, thanks for that. That's the only part in the home of sin. Huh? Seinectoche, yeah. Seinectoche. See. Oh, that's really good. Yeah, Antonin C and Seinectoche are both involved whole and part, right? But Antonin C, the universal whole and its part, and the Seinectoche, the composed or integral whole and its part, right? So when you see the Word was made flesh, that's the example of Seinectoche, right? He's a brain. You know? That's Seinectoche, right? But if you say Christ, right? And this common name anointed, right? He's said of him by Tona Masia, right? There's a transfer from the universal whole to a part. Augustine identifies this figure of speech, but it doesn't happen to name it, right? I think those names derive from the Greek rhetoricians, I think, you know? And so I don't say they profound those names, you know, or pretty revealing it. I don't know if that's so, but they are names for these things. You want to know them. To the first, therefore, it should be said, as Augustine says in the book on the agreement of the Gospels, some people, not knowing the way of Scripture, right, huh, wish to what? To what? Yeah. A night, those three hours, from what? Noontime, I guess, to what? Three o'clock. Three o'clock. As he's just saying, in the sixth, it was called the, what, the noon hour? Noontime. Nine. Okay. In which the sun was, what? Obscured, right, huh? And the day, those three other hours, in which, again, it was, what? Right into the earth, though. That is from nine, Ushkoyad setting, right, the sun, right? Um, there, it follows, then, the night of the, the future night of the Sabbath, which, with its day as computed, there would, therefore, be two, what, nights and two days, huh? Okay. After the Sabbath would follow the night of the first Sabbath, that is, what, starting to rise, the day of the Lord's day, in which the Lord resurrected, right? And still there, what? Yeah. It remains, therefore, that one find in that, uh, a custom mode of speaking of Scripture, right, huh? In which apartheid totem intelligitair, right, huh? Okay. So, selectively, it can be either one. It can be, using the name of the whole for the part, or part for the whole, right? But, it's the integral, or composed whole, right? Okay. What if I say, I went to the monastery today. I'm sorry, part of the integral whole for... Yeah, yeah. I didn't do it the whole day, right? I came up here in the afternoon, and I'd go home, and I'd go in the afternoon, right? So, it's a part of the day that I did it, right? Okay. What day can I see you? You know, and I could see me all day, but, you know? I used to go to the doctor, or something, or something like that, you know? I mean, we commonly use those ways of speaking. What's unfamiliar, maybe, is the word they used to name it, right? You know, the kind of used to use the example of the Moliere comedy, you know? The Moliere comedy, yeah. Where the guy who's been speaking prose all his life? I didn't know that. Well, it's a question of not knowing the word, right? So, I've been using Snekdiki all my life, but I have been. We have been using Snekdiki, right? And Antoine Messia, very common. I give you Mr. American, Mr. Republican, Mr. Integrity, my friend Bob Taft. So, you call him Mr. Republican, right? That's what figure of speech is that? Yeah, yeah, he's not the only Republican, right? But Mr. Republican, Mr. Integrity, my friend Bob Taft. So, thus, the one night and one day we take for one natural day, right? And thus, the first day is counted from its, what? Last part, right? Because Christ, in the sixth hour, was dead, right? Buried by the sixth day, I guess so. Secondly, the day is integral whole, with 24 hours of night and day, right? The night refers to the following, pertains to the third day, right? For just as the first day is an account of the future lapse of man, from light to darkness. So, this, an account of the operation of man, from darkness, is counted into, what? Light, huh? The key thing there is the idea of the part for the whole. To the second it should be said, huh? As Augustine says in the fourth book about the Trinity, Christ in the, what? Early morning, right? Did you kill, I guess, right? Rose, in which something of light appeared, right, huh? And still something remained of, what? The darkness of, what? Of night, huh? Once about the woman is said in John 20, that when Tenebrae, I don't guess it, where the darkness still was, it came to monument, right? And the reason of these darknesses, Gregory says, that Christ in the middle of the night rose, right, huh? Not dividing the night into two equal parts, but within that night, huh? That diluculum, that early morning, is a part of the night and part of the day it can be called on account of its, what? Communicate with everything, right? It's like twilight, you know, on the day, right? It's twilight, you know, day or night. It kind of partakes of both, right? Twilight. To the third, it should be said that so much does light in the death of Christ prevail that it signified through one day, right? Because the darkness of two nights, that is of our two-fold death there, the soul and body, it removes, right? It's one light, huh? And now we've got the descent of Christ to the, what? To hell, as they say in Scripture. I agree, don't you? Yeah, the descent of hell. So you have a separate question on what his body did or what happened to his body and what his soul, you know? Then, we've got time, right? Then when I consider about the descent of Christ to hell, and about this, eight things are asked, right? I gave a talk a long time on the descent of Christ. I called it the Forgotten Article, right? Because in the Nicene Creed, you don't have it. You have an Apostles' Creed, but not in the Nicene Creed. So you say the Nicene Creed, but people don't think about that so much, I call it the Forgotten Article. I said, what is the Forgotten Article? And they clicked the article. And about this, eight things are asked, right? First, was it suitable for Christ to descend to the infernal regions, right? Secondly, in what infernal region he descended, right? Whether he was as a whole in what? The infernal, right? Whether he contracted some delay there, huh? Whether he liberated the Holy Fathers from what? Yeah, yeah. Whether he liberated from the infernal, the damned, huh? Whether he liberated the boys who died in what? Original sin, huh? And whether he liberated men from what? Purgatory, huh? Okay. So, first article. To the first one proceeds thus. It seems that it was not suitable for Christ to descend to, what? Inferno, right, huh? For Augustine says in the Epistle to Vodius, Nor those, what? Very infernal regions. Uspiam. What does that mean? Uspiam. Uspiam. Yeah, to be called a good place, right, huh? But the soul of Christ does not descend to something bad. Because neither do these souls of the just descend to something, what? Bad, right? Therefore, it does not seem suitable that Christ would descend to hell, right? Of course, it's not a puzzle by descent to hell, but what does that mean? You use the word hell, right? It used to be the old standby of the, you know, four last things, right? Death, judgment, hell, and hell. You know, it was kind of the fear of God in people. Moreover, to descend to the infernal regions cannot belong to Christ according to his divine nature, which is entirely, what? Immobile on him. But it can only belong to him according to his assumed nature. But those things which Christ did or underwent in his assumed or taken on nature are ordered to human salvation, to which it does not seem to be necessary that Christ would descend, right, to hell, right? Because through his passion, which he sustained in this world, he liberated us from guilt and punishment. Therefore, it was not suitable that Christ descend to what? To hell, huh? Moreover, through the death of Christ, his soul was separated from his body, which was placed in the sepulcher. But it does not seem, however, that according to his soul alone, he would descend to hell, right, huh? Because the soul, since it is bodiless, huh? It's incorporeal. It does not seem that it can move, what? Locally, huh? In place, huh? For this belongs to bodies to move in place, huh? But the descent implies a bodily motion. And therefore, it was not suitable that Christ descend to hell, right? But against this is what is said in the symbol. And this is, of course, of the apostles, right? He descended to hell. And the apostle says, Ephesians 4, chapter 4, verse 9, Who is it that ascended, but because he descended first to the lower parts of the earth, right? And the glass says to hell, right? So why did he go down there? Good question, Tom says. I answer, it should be said that it was suitable for Christ to descend to hell, right? First, because he himself came to, what? Carry our, what? Punishment. That he might, what? Free us from this punishment, right? According to that of the prophet Isaiah. Truly, he bore our, what? Affirmities and our sorrows he carried. But from sin, man encouraged not only the death of the body, but also his descent to what? Hill. And therefore, just as it was suitable for him to die, that he might liberate us from death, so it was suitable that he would descend to the lower regions, that he might liberate us from his descent to hell. Whence it is said in the book of the prophet Lucie, I will be your death, oh death, huh? I will be, what? Your bite, huh? Morseless, right? A morsel? Fair enough, because he doesn't take the dam out, he takes the, that's right. He bites it. Second, because it was suitable that, what? The devil being overcome to his passion, he would, what? Yeah. Who were detained in hell, right? According to that of the prophet Zachary 9, you also, in the blood of your, what? Testament, have, what? Sent, I guess, out? Those chained in the lake, huh? And in Colossians 2, taking away, I suppose, right? The princes and the powers, he brought them forth confidently. Third, that he might show his power in, on the earth living and dying, so also he might show his power in, what? In hell? By visiting it and by, what? Illuminating it, huh? Whence it is said in Psalm 23, Lift up, O gates, your, what? Princes, your gates? That is, princes of hell, right, huh? Take away your power, which, up till now, you have, what, detained men in hell, right? And thus, in the name of Jesus, every knee might be bent, not only that of Celestial, but also that of Inferno, as is said in Philippians 2. To the first, therefore, it should be said that the name of hell sounds in the evil of what? Punishment, right, huh? Not over in the evil of what? Hilt. Hilt, huh? Whence it was appropriate for Christ to descend to hell, not because he was, what, in debt to punishment or owed punishment, but that he might liberate those who were, what? Subject to punishment, huh? And the punishment here, especially, is being denied the vision of... God, right? Which could not be overcome until he had died on the cross. To the second should be said that the Passion of Christ was a universal cause of human salvation for both the living and the dead. But the universal cause should be applied to singular effects through something, what, special. Whence just as the power of the Passion of Christ is applied to those living through the sacraments configuring us to the Passion of Christ, right? So also is applied to the dead through the descent of Christ to what? To hell, right, huh? On kind of which it is significantly said in Zechariah 9 that he brought out those, what, chains in the lake, right? He brought them out in the blood of his testament. That is through the power of his, what, passion, right? So what the sacraments, in a sense, do for us, the living, you don't have sacraments for the dead, do you? But there has to be something, you know, whereby the universal causality of Christ's death on the cross is applied to those who are already dead at this time, right? Who died before Christ became man or died before Christ died on the cross, right? And that was done by his, what, descendant to hell, right? Okay. So that makes sense, huh? Now, it doesn't go into the whole explanation number three, right? But the third should be said that the soul of Christ does not go down to hell by that kind of motion by which bodies are moved, right? But by that kind of motion by which angels are moved. Okay, and then you bring it back to the first part, right? So the angel is what, said to move because he applies his power to something that it was not applied to before, right? So Christ is applying his, what, power to those who are, you know, right? Okay. Would he take another article or not? Okay. Where the Christ descended also to the hell of the damned, right? Now to the second one goes forward thus, it seemed that Christ descended also to the hell of the, what, damned, huh? But notice he goes back to when he first numerates the articles. In quem inferno descender it, huh? In what hell he descended, right, huh? And so Tom's going to make a distinction between the hell in which the prophets and so on are, right? From that of the damned, huh? Okay. The second one proceeds thus, it seems that Christ descended even or also to the, what, hell of the damned. For it is said from the mouth of divine wisdom in Ecclesiasticus chapter 24, I will penetrate all the lower parts of the earth. But among the lower parts of the earth are counted also the hell of the damned. According to that is Psalm 62. They will go into the lower parts of the earth. Therefore Christ, who is the wisdom of God descended also to the hell of the damned, huh? Moreover, Acts 2.24, Peter says that God raised up Christ, huh? The pains of hell being, what, dissolved, right? According as it was impossible for it, it was impossible for it to, what, to be held by it, right? But there are no pains in the hell of the fathers, right? Nor also in the hell of the, what, boys who are not punished by the pain of sins on account of actual sin. But only the pain of, what, loss of sin. Therefore Christ descended to the, what, hell of the damned, or also in purgatory, where men are punished by the pain of sins for actual, what, sins, huh? Morver. I have a lot of objections here, huh? More 1 Peter 3. It is said that Christ, to those who were contained in prison, right, huh? He came, uh, he preached in the spirit, right, huh? Uh, to those who were incredulous at some time, right? Which, as Athanasius says in the Epistle to Epictetus, is understood about the descent of Christ to, to hell. For it is said that the body of Christ was placed in the sepulcher when he, what, went to preach to those who were in the guardian of the two spirits, as Peter says. I'm going to obscure that. But it stands that the, those who were not believing are in the hell of the damned, right, huh? Therefore Christ descended to the hell of the damned, huh? See, he went to preach down there to the incredulous, right? They'd be the, the damned, so. Go on, yeah, yeah. Morver. Augustine says in the Epistle to Avodius, Se in Ilum, Ebrehe Sinum, if Christ into that, what? Bosom of Abraham, huh? Christ's dad came. Second scripture would have said, not naming the, what? And it's sour, right? I wonder if anyone would dare to assert that he was descended to hell. But because evident testimonies both commemorate hell and its sorrows, no cause occurs wherefore one believes that the Savior came there except that he might, what? Down from the sorrows, right? But the place of sorrows is the, uh, hell of the damned. Therefore Christ descended to the, what? Hell of the damned, right? Was there sorrow there for the, the fathers, or the prophets there not seeing God as he is? We'll see what Thomas does. Morver, as Augustine says in a certain sermon about the Passion, Christ descending to, what? Hell? All those just ones who were, what? Restricted or virginal sin? He absolved, right? But among those was also Job, who of himself says, in the most deepest parts of hell, all might have descended. Therefore Christ, as far as the most depths of the hell descended, right? Now, against this is said about the hell of the damned, Job chapter 10, before I, what? Go and do not return to the dark earth and covered with the cloud of death, right? So the, part of the translation, I guess. Right? Etcetera. But there is no coming together of light to darkness, as is said in 2 Corinthians. I don't know. Coming with. Therefore Christ, who is light, did not descend to the, what? Hell of the damned, huh? I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I answer it should be said that in two ways it said something to be what? Somewhere, yeah. In one way through its effect. And in this way, Christ in each hell descended, right? But in different ways. For in the hell of the damned, he had this effect that descending to hell, he, what? A few of them you might say, right, huh? Of their incredulity and their, what? Malice, right? A breathing, you might say, or something like that. To those other who were detained in purgatory, he gave them the hope of, what? Of obtaining glory, right? But to the holy fathers, huh? Who, for original sin alone, were detained in hell, he poured in the light of eternal glory. See, when Thomas, when we, in fact, when he divided the, kind of the six chief articles of faith about the humanity of Christ, huh? There's two ways of dividing this, huh? And one way you have that in the eighth psalm there, you know? Or you might take the salt, the articles of dissent, right? And then the articles of ascent. And so, there's three articles of dissent, right? You know, he took on the nature of a slave, right? Like, he says in the Philippines, I guess, St. Paul, right? Okay? And then you have, what? His death, passion of death, right? And then his descent into hell, right? He who lowers himself should be exalted, right? And so, contrary to his death is his, what? His resurrection. And contrary to his descent into hell is his ascension. And then, kind of, his second coming, right, huh? Which is in glory, kind of, for the first coming, which is in, what? Humility, right, huh? Okay? But Thomas says explicitly, you know, that in a way, the resurrection is a reward of the death, right? And the ascension of the, what? Descent, right, huh? That's one way of dividing them, huh? And there you divide them into two. And each of the two into, what, three. The three articles of descent and the three articles in the sense of ascent, right, huh? Okay? But then, in the te deyam, you have another way of dividing the articles of faith, huh? And then you have, he is, you divide it into three, right? And then, the first one is the, what? Incarnation, right, huh? And then, in the middle, you have the main thing he came for, which is his death on the cross, right? And then he gives us the, what, effect of that, huh? And that's in the resurrection, the descent into hell, the resurrection, and the ascension. And then there's the, what, second coming, where we're going to be judged and so on, right? So you divide it into those three, right? And the middle is divided into those four, but you take the, the meritorious death on the cross, and then, what he gives us, right? And then he goes back to the old vision of the Greeks, the good of the soul, the good of the body, and the exterior good, right? So he goes to the, the descent into hell, he gives them the Vedic vision, the fathers, right? That's the good of the soul. The resurrection, brings in the good of the body, and then the ascension, the good of a good place, which is the exterior good, right? So it's kind of beautiful the way it's presented in that way, huh? Let's see, what are the kind of levels that you, there's the hell of the dead, there's the hell where the fathers are, and there's purgatory? Yeah, yeah. So he's giving the, the fathers who are only detained by original sin, right? And she's dying on the cross, he can give them now the glory, right? So the good of their soul, right? Is obviously the Vedic vision, right? And to those who are in purgatory, he gives them the hope of the glory, right? So that's in a way the good of the soul too, right? Not as completely good, obviously, as the vision itself, but you will now, eventually, you know, which you've been purged a little more. You know how I'm entertained. I was quoting your father standing in the feast that had married, so I, you know, I would have saved my mother, you know, never stop praying for my father after he died, you know, because we don't know when someone is, what, out of, yeah, out of purgatory or in heaven, you know? But you never know. So, I mean, there's some special revelation which is unlikely to take place, you know? So you should always continue to pray for this person, right? And I suppose if the person is in heaven, your prayers go somewhere else and somebody else is a benefit, I suppose, right? So it's not lost in the sense that you're praying for someone who's already in heaven and so on. So, I mean, so there's this hope, you know, that's getting there, right? Okay. So, to the Holy Fathers, then he says, who were detained in hell for only original sin, right? Didn't have any actual sins that aren't forgiven, right? He, what, poured in the light of eternal glory, right? Okay. But to those who were detained in purgatory, he gave the hope of what? Obtaining eventually glory, right? But now he says, of course, he has the effect of refuting, you might say, or upbraiding the incredulity and malice of those who are in the hell of the damned, right? So he has an effect upon all three, right? But in another way, something is said to be somewhere through its essence, right? And in this way, the soul of Christ descended onto that place of hell in which the just were detained, right? That those who he, through his, what, grace, visited in any way, right, according to his divinity, also according to his soul, he visited and in, what, place, he's bigger as a place. Thus, in one part of hell existing, his effect, in some way, is derived to all the parts of hell, right? That's the first thing he spoke about. Just as in one place of the earth, suffering, he liberated the whole world by his, what, action, right? So in a sense, in one hell, the hell of the, fathers, I guess, it's not clear for me if that concludes the purgatory too, it might, but the hell will be saved him, right, then the effect of his being there extended even to the, what, hell of the dam, right, you know, I don't think very implicitly. To the first therefore it should be said that Christ who is the wisdom of God penetrated all of the lower parts of the earth, but not in a, what, local way, right, according to his soul by running around all of them, right, but by extending the effect of his power in some way to all, right, but thus that only he, what, illuminated or enlightened only the just, right, and it follows for it follows and I will enlighten all those hoping in the, what, the Lord, now what about this sorrow here, okay, the second should be said, that two-fold is what? Sadness, huh? One is from the passion of punishment which men suffer for actual sin. According to that of Psalm 17, the sorrows of hell surrounded me, right, huh? Another is the sorrow of the delay of what? Glory, According to that of Proverbs 13, that hope which is deferred, right, afflicts the, what, soul, right, huh? Which sorrow also the Holy Fathers suffered in what? Yes, there was a certain sadness there, right, huh? Okay. To which signify Augustine in his sermon about the passion says that with day, A prayer, a, yeah, my buddy's funeral there, the lacrimosa, you know, the lacrimosa, Immobile, obsequation, that means it has a sense of researching, right? They prayed Christ with a, what? Tearful, yeah. Intuity, yeah. It says, both sorrows, Christ resolved or solved, descending to hell, but in other ways, right? For the punishments of, sorrows of punishments, the untied, preserving, by preserving from them, just as the doctor untied sickness, which he preserves, from which he preserves someone through medicine, right? But the sorrows caused from the delay of glory, actually, he solved, giving, what? Glory, right? What about this text from Peter, right? Right down, about going down to incredulous. To the third, it should be said that that which there, Peter says, by some is referred to the descent of Christ to hell, thus expounding that word to those who were contained in prison, right? That is in hell. In spirit, that is according to the soul. Christ coming, preached, who were incredulous sometime, right? When, as Augustine says in the third book, that just as those who are on earth are evangelized, right, so also those who are in hell. Not that the, what? He would convert the incredulous to faith, right? But that he might, what? Put to shame or refute, in a sense, their infidelity, right? Because that predication, in no other way can be understood than as a manifestation of his divinity, which he manifested to the infernals through a virtuous or powerful descent of Christ to hell. Now, Augustine, however, better expounds this in the epistle to the bodious, that he refers not to the descent of Christ to the, what? Hell, but to the operation of his divinity, which he exercised in the beginning of the world. That the sense would be that to those who were contained in prison, that is to say, those living in a mortal body, which is, as we're a kind of prison of the soul, like Socrates the Hada, by the power or the spirit of his divinity coming, he preached through internal inspirations, right? And also exterior admonitions through the mouths of the just. To those he preached who were, what? At some time, unbelieving, right, huh? To Noah, what? When they expected the patience of God, which should be deferred the punishment of the flood. But once he's joined to that, the days of Noah, when the ark was, what, fabricated, huh? In case you have to take those texts maybe one scripture to see the fullness of this discourse here, right? But that's in, he said, melius exponent, right, huh? To the fourth it should be said that the womb of Abraham, right, huh? Can be considered according to two things. One way, according to that rest which was there from sensible pain, and as this, and as according to this, there does not belong to it neither the name of hell, nor that there are there some sorrows. Another way can be considered as regards a privation or a lack of the glory hoped for. And according to this, it does have the notion of hell and of sorrow. And therefore, now is said the womb of Abraham, that rest of the blessed, is not ever called hell, nor either said now to be in the womb of Abraham, from what, sorrow, so I think. And Shakespeare's, what, play there, they're going to the womb of, of what, Arthur, right? Talking about, about Falstaff dying, right? These little cruptions in the, in the English mind, you know, not that Shakespeare thinks that, you know, but I mean, so the, the womb of Abraham, they're going to the womb of Arthur, you know, Arthur, King Arthur. Yeah, yeah, yeah. There's all the touches of Shakespeare's head, there's all St. Christ, you know. It's like when the lamb that he comes in, when Falstaff is dying, you know, in the crisis. He doesn't think there's any reason yet to, you know, worry about, you know, penance or anything like that, you know. You know, we haven't talked about that yet, you know. Kind of thoughtless minds these people have, you know. But Shakespeare, you know, he's very gentle with the common people, you know, and, you know, presents them, you know, without, you know, holding what they can tell you, you know, but just, as they are, you know. You know, Shakespeare understood women better than they understand themselves, right? He said a lot. Although, although in Simuline, he says, who is can read a woman? Who is, who is it that can read a woman, can understand a woman? That's what Simuline says, at the end when it comes to the true evil of the queen that's brought out, the true evil nature of the queen that's brought out. Can we look again at this response? Because we don't quite understand. What do you mean? The fourth one. Oh, okay. That's kind of the thing that was in the body of the text there, right? About the use of the word hell and sorrow, right? Because there's a sorrow that you're being punished, right? And there's a different kind of sorrow there, just when what you hope for and expect is, what, delayed, right? So there was that kind of sorrow in the fathers, right, or in the prophets, right, huh? Yeah. I suppose I was more interested in this understanding of the bosom of Abraham. Well, then the bosom of Abraham could be taken into either one of those senses, right? Yeah, but that's what I'm confused on. You're in the bosom of Abraham when you're saved, and then when you possess the actual division of God, right? Yeah. In one case, there would be no sorrow at all, right? You possess the division of God, right? Yeah. But when you're using your body back, though, you know, there's a little bit of, you know. Augustine Townsend, you're not perfectly happy until you get your body back again. Yeah. You know, you have the substance of it in the division of God, right? But Thomas says, you're more perfect when you get your body back. You'll be more whole. And therefore, you'll be even more implicit in a little way. When he comes here, he gives these two ways, and then he ends with the thing about the rest of the piece of the blessing, which is basically... Well, when Christ talks about the man who's in the... who died, you know, Lazarus, or who it is. Not Lazarus, but the man... The rich man. Yeah. Lazarus is in the bosom of Abraham. Yeah, yeah. I mean, if he's speaking, you know, at that time, right, where he's not yet died on the cross, right, then he's not in the bosom of Abraham in the sense that he sees God as he is, right? Right, yeah. But he's not suffering anymore, right? He punished him, right? Oh, okay, I see. I see. But then you might use the term, the bosom of Abraham, you know, for being in the bosom of Abraham, for being in the state of seeing God, too, right? Yeah, I see. It could be a different use of the word, right? Yep, okay. I see, yeah, that's why he said in the last sentence, for reason. And therefore now, he said... Yeah. Yeah. Now we call it the bosom of Abraham, that rest of the blessed, but not now would it be called infernal sight, nor now would it be said to be in the womb of Abraham's sorrows. In a sense, to some extent, the vision of God is kind of the reward of faith, you know. Abraham is our father in faith, so maybe this is one reason why you speak of being in the bosom of Abraham, right? Now the fifth one is about the most profound parts of hell, right? And Thomas is quoting Gregory here, right? To the fifth it should be said, as Gregory there says, those, what? Of hell, which might be the what? Hell. He calls the what? Most deep hell, right? For if, as regards to the height of the heaven, right, that dark air, right, is hell, right, as regards that same altitude of the air, the earth which lies below, and is understood to be hell, can be what? Profound, huh? There's a question about the thing there, right? You might think that the most profound parts of hell is where, like, Donnie's got, you know, the hell, Satan down there in the ice there, you know, the bottom of hell. But I don't think he's taken that sense necessarily in this sense, right? Simply because they're so far distant from the heavens, right? All, even the higher parts, you know, which are the hell of the fathers, right, huh? The hell of the prophets, huh? That might be called profound, right? Most profound, you know. He's the one, but he takes it there. So he's got to stop there, I guess, huh? Yeah, okay.