escent
of Christ pertains to His humiliation, not to His glorification and
triumph." (441.) "The descent to hell was by God's judgment laid upon
Christ as the last degree of His humiliation and exinanition and as the
extreme part of His obedience and satisfaction." (441.) "Peter clearly
teaches, Acts 2, that the soul of Christ felt the pangs of hell and
death while His body was resting in the sepulcher." (441.) "What Christ
experienced when He descended into hell is known to Himself, not to us;
may we acknowledge and accept with grateful minds that He descended
into hell for us. But let us not inquire what it was that He experienced
for us in His descent, for we may piously remain ignorant of matters
which God did not reveal to His Church, and which He does not demand
that she know." (444.)

220. Opposed by His Colleagues.

The views of Aepinus, first presented in lectures delivered 1544 before
the ministers of Hamburg, called forth dissent and opposition on the
part of his colleagues. Before long, however (1549), the controversy
began to assume a virulent character. While the conduct of Aepinus was
always marked by dignity, moderation, and mildness, his opponents
Tileman Epping, John Gartz, and Caspar Hackrott, ventilated and
assailed his teaching in their pulpits.

The chief argument against Aepinus was that his doctrine conflicted
with, and invalidated, the words of Christ, "It is finished," "To-day
shalt thou be with Me in Paradise." Aepinus rejoined that the word
"to-day" is an ambiguous term, denoting both the immediate presence and
the indefinite near future (_pro praesenti et imminente tempore
indefinito_). (414.) However, it was not in every respect Luther's
position which was occupied by some of the opponents of Aepinus. Gratz
is reported to have taught that the article concerning the descent of
Christ was not necessary to salvation that _descendere_ (descend) was
identical with _sepeliri_ (to be buried), that the descent to hell
referred to the anguish and temptation of Christ during His life; that
Christ immediately after His death entered paradise together with the
malefactor, that the work of atonement and satisfaction was completed
with His death. (446.)

In 1550 the city council of Hamburg asked Melanchthon for his opinion.
But Melanchthon's answer of September, 1550, signed also by Bugenhagen,
was rather indefinite, vague, and evasive. He said, in substance:
Although we have frequently heard the Re