Ship of Fools: The resurrection and cremation

Thread: The resurrection and cremation Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.

To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=023116

Posted by irish_lord99 (# 16250) on :

Belief in the resurrection of the dead is a part of the creeds recited by the Orthodox, Roman Catholics, and many Protestants.

I believe the Apostles creed goes as far as to say "the resurrection of the body."

So what do the various traditions of the faith believe about cremation then? How can the body be resurrected if it's been turned to ash, or can it at all? Is the resurrection of the physical body, or something different?

I'm especially interested in the Orthodox perspective, but curious to hear what our RC and Protestant brothers and sisters have to say as well.

Posted by Horseman Bree (# 5290) on :

Maybe you could apply the same reasoning to those whose bodies were eaten by fish, or by lobsters, or by lions...

And what about bodies that have simply and naturally decomposed after being buried?

Or those bodies that were blasted into nothing much by bombs?

What happens to the original legs, arms, hands hip joints, teeth, whatever that have been replaced by specially-made prosthetics

The component atoms could presumably be retrieved by an All-Powerful God, unless they had been used by more than one human....

How silly do you want this thread to be?

Posted by Janine (# 3337) on :

All the dead from all time will not have all their component parts together to be resurrected. It's silly to worry about it. Not that one should flout one's religious traditions -- that might also cause anxiety, I guess. Hopefully one could counteract all that worry with an understanding of the grace of God.

Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on :

Putting the body to rest in a grave is a powerful sign of one's faith in the resurrection, a direct emulation of what happened to our Lord. Cremating the body is a much less clear sign, to say the least. The RCC did finally allow cremation in the last century, but reluctantly so. She was accommodating those who had great difficulties of the financial and practical kind to make that sign, difficulties that have become much more pressing for people living in ever growing cities.

That God is capable of restoring a body even if it was dispersed all the way to its nuclear constituents nobody doubts. That also sometimes in the past a proper burial could not be given is obvious. But it does not follow that this sign is meaningless, and it is sad to see it dismissed so readily.

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :

How very Thomist.

Posted by Steve H (# 17102) on :

Bodies get recycled. All the atoms and molecules in my body have previously been part of many other people's bodies. Therefore, whatever gets resurrected, if anything, isn't the body that died, because there aren't enough atoms and molecules to go round.

Posted by Balaam (# 4543) on :

Doesn't the Bible say we get spiritual bodies? So why are we so worried about the atoms of these earthly ones?

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :

Ah but you make a powerful statement of faith, a superior one in fact by being laid to rest in a cave, wrapped in spiced linen, like a good Roman. It's obvious isn't it? I mean, being put in a box and having six feet of dirt thrown on you, how second rate a Christian is that of you?

Posted by Balaam (# 4543) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Steve H:
Bodies get recycled. All the atoms and molecules in my body have previously been part of many other people's bodies. Therefore, whatever gets resurrected, if anything, isn't the body that died, because there aren't enough atoms and molecules to go round.

Amen Steve.

Around these parts we even sing about it. Ilkley Moor baht 'at

Translation (For those not privileged to understand Yorkshire):

If you don't wear a hat on Ilkley Moor you will catch a cold and die and have to be buried. Your body will then be consumed by worms, the worms consumed by ducks and the ducks by us. Therefore we'll have eaten you.

Posted by hatless (# 3365) on :

It's not the problem of finding the atoms that bothers me about cremation, it's the ghastly aesthetics of the industrial process (Siemens initially, I believe) coupled with the weird curtain thing. I much prefer grass, mud and weather.

Posted by Balaam (# 4543) on :

[Big Grin]

Love it that you appeared on cue, hatless [Big Grin]

There's something satisfying about relatives being able to put a shovel-full of soil in there too. I prefer internment to ignition too. But it has no effect on what, or who, is resurrected.

Posted by otyetsfoma (# 12898) on :

As well as the "ilkly moor" problem about literal resurrection is the problem that in this lifetime my body constantly renews itself so that every so often (I have heard those that know these things say every seven years) my body has completely changed every atom. I am no scientist, but if that is true it makes it easier for me to accept the resurrection of the body, because there has been some contnuity of self, even as the atoms change.

Posted by Freddy (# 365) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Balaam:
Doesn't the Bible say we get spiritual bodies? So why are we so worried about the atoms of these earthly ones?

Yeah.

Posted by hatless (# 3365) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Balaam:
Love it that you appeared on cue, hatless

Striding over t'moor, singin' wheer hass tha bin sin' ah saw thee.

Apparently the song is in Halifax dialect. And the tune is from Kent. I sing in a local choir and most of us hate the song with genuine feeling!

Posted by Fr Weber (# 13472) on :

Cremation is not a problem unless the person being cremated intends it as a refutation of physical resurrection.

I prefer to hold funerals with the body present in a casket, but that's not always possible. Quite often the funeral director descends like a vulture within an hour of decease, "We'll take care of everything, just leave it to us," and by the time the funeral arrangements can be made there's nothing but ashes.

Posted by LutheranChik (# 9826) on :

In the ELCA there's no prohibition against, or high-minded antipathy toward, cremation. As others have noted, when we die our bodies are simply recycled, as it were, back into our carbon-based universe, whether we're buried or cremated or lost at see or exploded to kingdom come.

Posted by kankucho (# 14318) on :

quote:
Originally posted by otyetsfoma:
As well as the "ilkly moor" problem about literal resurrection is the problem that in this lifetime my body constantly renews itself so that every so often (I have heard those that know these things say every seven years) my body has completely changed every atom. I am no scientist, but if that is true it makes it easier for me to accept the resurrection of the body, because there has been some contnuity of self, even as the atoms change.

That's the general idea and, as I read down the thread, I'm pleased to see the discussion has gone down this route. But the seven-year cycle is inaccurate. Neurons in the cerebral cortex are with us for life, water molecules are of course mostly only a part of us for a few hours at a time, and fat cells are replaced at around 10 per cent per year, so a complete change will occur over 10 years.

The continuity of self is well-analogised in the old joke about 'grandfather's trusty axe'(he's had it for 40 years and it's only had two new heads and three new shafts). Our individual identity is essentially a consistency agreed by constantly changing constituents; to paraphrase my signature quote of Sagan, a small chunk of the universe knowing itself.

Posted by HughWillRidmee (# 15614) on :

quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:
Putting the body to rest in a grave is a powerful sign of one's faith in the resurrection, a direct emulation of what happened to our Lord. Cremating the body is a much less clear sign, to say the least. The RCC did finally allow cremation in the last century, but reluctantly so. She was accommodating those who had great difficulties of the financial and practical kind to make that sign, difficulties that have become much more pressing for people living in ever growing cities.

That God is capable of restoring a body even if it was dispersed all the way to its nuclear constituents nobody doubts. That also sometimes in the past a proper burial could not be given is obvious. But it does not follow that this sign is meaningless, and it is sad to see it dismissed so readily.

quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC....
How very Thomist

Is "Thomist" another way of saying wrong?

Posted by churchgeek (# 5557) on :

I've always used the arguments others have made here: Our atoms get recycled both while we're alive and after we're dead; and what about martyrs who were burned, eaten, etc. Add to that complete disintegration - in an episode of PBS' "Secrets of the Dead," they investigated a graveyard somewhere in (I think) Nova Scotia where lots of Titanic victims were buried. Because the soil was so inundated with water over the past century, the remains - bones and all - were completely gone with the exception of part of an arm bone from a baby, which was preserved by a medal placed over the baby's folded arms when it was buried.

Anyway, I've read the Catholic position on cremation, and one thing I liked about it was the insistence that keeping your loved one's ashes on the mantle is not a proper Christian burial. It's hard for me to draw an exact line between that and keeping a loved one's possessions as a material connection to them, but there seems to me to be something very healthy about committing a loved one's remains to the earth - or to a columbarium (in a cemetery or a church).

There are also environmental considerations, something I'm not very knowledgeable about. It's generally illegal to be buried "naturally;" is it better for the environment to be cremated or to be treated with all those embalming chemicals and laid in the ground encased in concrete (which, of course, isn't an impermeable barrier)?

As for land use, I hate the idea, personally, of taking up all that space when I'm gone (I hope to be inurned in my home church), but I don't think burial is a waste of space in most cases. In some cities, it may be seen as such, but that's one of the sins of capitalism: commodifying everything to the point that burying the dead, a very basic charitable work in many religions, is thought to be a waste of valuable real estate.

Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Freddy:

quote:
Originally posted by Balaam:
Doesn't the Bible say we get spiritual bodies? So why are we so worried about the atoms of these earthly ones?
Yeah.

No. The bible says we will have physical and spiritual bodies. Like Jesus'.

Posted by Anglican_Brat (# 12349) on :

When I was a child, I read a depiction of the rapture in a children's illustrated Bible featuring hands coming out of the ground in a graveyard. It spooked me.

I'm assuming the final resurrection is not like us becoming walking zombies.

[ 01. June 2012, 02:07: Message edited by: Anglican_Brat ]

Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :

The dead raised in the gospel of Matthew at Jesus' resurrection do rather give you that impression don't they?

I asked someone about cremation once and the resurrected body. They said it didn't matter because we would be given an new body.

Kinda makes sense according to what Paul says in 1 Cor 15. We will be raised in an imperishable body.

Posted by Steve H (# 17102) on :

quote:
Originally posted by hatless:
It's not the problem of finding the atoms that bothers me about cremation, it's the ghastly aesthetics of the industrial process (Siemens initially, I believe) coupled with the weird curtain thing. I much prefer grass, mud and weather.

When I pop my clogs, they can chuck me on the compost heap or flog me to McDonald's to make burgers with, for all I care.

Posted by Lord Jestocost (# 12909) on :

I read up on how cremation works following the recent death from cancer of a dear friend. I was very pleased to note that first of all "the body is subjected to a jet-enginelike column of flame, aimed at the torso".

In other words, the cancer that killed him was the first to get it. Take that, you bastard.

Beats burial any day.

Posted by Galloping Granny (# 13814) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Steve H:

quote:
Originally posted by hatless:
It's not the problem of finding the atoms that bothers me about cremation, it's the ghastly aesthetics of the industrial process (Siemens initially, I believe) coupled with the weird curtain thing. I much prefer grass, mud and weather.
When I pop my clogs, they can chuck me on the compost heap or flog me to McDonald's to make burgers with, for all I care.

I was told that St Francis had the same idea, and told his followers to take his body to the town tip when he'd finished with it. So they did. And the next generation came and built a shrine on the spot.

Maybe I was misinformed, but it makes a good parable.

GG

Posted by Avila (# 15541) on :

quote:
Originally posted by churchgeek:
There are also environmental considerations, something I'm not very knowledgeable about. It's generally illegal to be buried "naturally;" is it better for the environment to be cremated or to be treated with all those embalming chemicals and laid in the ground encased in concrete (which, of course, isn't an impermeable barrier)?

In the UK it is illegal to dispose of a body unofficially (ie without the paperwork) - though I was surprised to find that you can apply to bury someone on your own land, though it has to be declared on the deeds ever after and certain to bring down the property value!

Here embalming is not common - it is an extra expense, though it is used if bodies need to be repatriated or otherwise delayed in burial/cremation. I don't recognise the surrounded in concrete reference - here is it usually a standing stone at the head, although older tombs of the high and mighty were stone boxes.Natural or woodland burial sites are becoming more common where there are no grave stones or markers, but they still go in in a coffin whether wood, wicker, or even cardboard!

Posted by ken (# 2460) on :

Buried bodies rot and get mineralised, i.e broken down to inorganic molecules, anyway. The actual atoms will be dispersed and incoprorated into other living things. Every time you breath in, you breath in atoms that will have been part of many living things in the past, including people. Mostly oines they breathed out rather than lost after they died, but still many.

If you go back in time far enough for the atmosphere to be completely mixed you will be breathing in stuff breathed out by everyone who was then alive.

So every breath you take you really do take in actual physical particles of the real body of Jesus. And of everybody else who was alive at that time. And every largish non-human organism as well.

Mass of atmosphere is of order of 10^18 kg

Typical human shallow breath is perhaps a tenth of a litre or more, so of the order of 10^-4 kg of air, maybe up to 10^-3 at the most.

Avogadro's number is of the order of 10^23

Most people breath out thousands of times every day

Simples...

Posted by Aggie (# 4385) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Avila:

quote:
Originally posted by churchgeek:
There are also environmental considerations, something I'm not very knowledgeable about. It's generally illegal to be buried "naturally;" is it better for the environment to be cremated or to be treated with all those embalming chemicals and laid in the ground encased in concrete (which, of course, isn't an impermeable barrier)?

In the UK it is illegal to dispose of a body unofficially (ie without the paperwork) - though I was surprised to find that you can apply to bury someone on your own land, though it has to be declared on the deeds ever after and certain to bring down the property value!

Here embalming is not common - it is an extra expense, though it is used if bodies need to be repatriated or otherwise delayed in burial/cremation. I don't recognise the surrounded in concrete reference - here is it usually a standing stone at the head, although older tombs of the high and mighty were stone boxes.Natural or woodland burial sites are becoming more common where there are no grave stones or markers, but they still go in in a coffin whether wood, wicker, or even cardboard!

Cremation is not necessarily more environmentally-friendly, as toxic gases: mercury, sulphur dioxide etc, can be released, and also the process uses up a lot of energy. Although modern crematoria have tried to mitigate the release of toxins by using filters on their chimneys.
Many old cemeteries and burial grounds are a haven for wildlife, as they often provide a green oasis that is relatively undisturbed in the middle of towns and cities.

Posted by ken (# 2460) on :

quote:
Originally posted by churchgeek:
It's generally illegal to be buried "naturally;"

Really? Where? [Confused]

quote:
As for land use, I hate the idea, personally, of taking up all that space when I'm gone...

Other way round. Cemneteries are one of the grenest thigns we do. Havens for wildlife, sometimes in the hearts of cities. As they tend to be more opvergrown and less manicured and weedkilled than public parks they usually have a much greter dicversity of green planbts, which in tuen leads to greater diversity of animals, especially invertebrates, which attract different birds and mammals - old cemetreries are one of the most biodiverse environments we have. Slightly ahead of railway cuttings and neglected suburban gardens - all of which beat farmland hollow.

The recent abandoning of burial in favour of cremation is nothing to do with environmentlaconsiderations. Its partly cost - creamation is much cheaper - and partly that our non-Christian secular majority are re-accquiring the pre-Christian fear of living among dead bodies.

In the ancient Roman world you had to bury or burn your dead outside the town because you didn't want to release all those vengeful spirits anywhere near the houses of the living. Christianity inverted the geography of the city, building churches on the graves of dead Christians, then building houses around the churches, so the dead are literally at the centre of life. In Britain the 19th century began the process of shipping the dead out of town again.

Though very often our towns and cities expanded so fast they caught up with the previously suburban cemeteries whiuh are now beuatiful green spaces in the inner suburbs. And Nunhead Cemetery in South-East London is the best of them [Smile]

Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Ah but you make a powerful statement of faith, a superior one in fact by being laid to rest in a cave, wrapped in spiced linen, like a good Roman. It's obvious isn't it? I mean, being put in a box and having six feet of dirt thrown on you, how second rate a Christian is that of you?

If you just get chucked in a box and dumped into the ground, then indeed that's not much of a sign. The precise procedure of laying a body to rest is not at issue here, but the care and reverence expressed in doing so. And yes, I mean the care and reverence extended to the body of the deceased, not just to the deceased.

quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
I asked someone about cremation once and the resurrected body. They said it didn't matter because we would be given an new body.

You might want to consider John 20:26-28 there. I think it is rather clear that our bodies cannot be "new" as in totally unrelated to our current ones. A human being is not a spirit which happens to direct a body, like a driver would a car. We are embodied, what we are is closely entwined with our material being. There is an ability to continue being oneself in spite of changes to the body. If I lose an arm, I remain me. However, I do not merely remain me. That loss will inevitably change me. If God is going to resurrect us, then He must resurrect us in our bodies. Perhaps not precisely in the particular atomic arrangement we have occupied just prior to death. But also not simply in some form totally unrelated to it. Because otherwise we would rapidly become someone else entirely, if we would not simply cease to function as a being in something similar to a transplant rejection.

Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :

ken, you forgot to take the gardening gloves off before typing that last post [Razz]

Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :

quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
I asked someone about cremation once and the resurrected body. They said it didn't matter because we would be given an new body.
You might want to consider John 20:26-28 there. I think it is rather clear that our bodies cannot be "new" as in totally unrelated to our current ones. A human being is not a spirit which happens to direct a body, like a driver would a car. We are embodied, what we are is closely entwined with our material being. There is an ability to continue being oneself in spite of changes to the body. If I lose an arm, I remain me. However, I do not merely remain me. That loss will inevitably change me. If God is going to resurrect us, then He must resurrect us in our bodies. Perhaps not precisely in the particular atomic arrangement we have occupied just prior to death. But also not simply in some form totally unrelated to it. Because otherwise we would rapidly become someone else entirely, if we would not simply cease to function as a being in something similar to a transplant rejection.

Agreed.

But after two thousand years in a grave, there aint gonna be much there to resurrect. If anything. Dust to dust, ashes to ashes.....

Posted by IngoB (# 8700) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
But after two thousand years in a grave, there aint gonna be much there to resurrect. If anything. Dust to dust, ashes to ashes.....

Ezekiel 37.

Posted by Vulpior (# 12744) on :

There was a mention of columbaria.

Our Diocesan Bishop will no longer approve faculty requests for columbaria. The view taken is that they have a limited life (even if a long life, still limited) and depositing ashes in a columbarium is simply postponing final disposal and placing an impost on some future generation.

Ashes are expected to be scattered or to go to ground. When gardens of remembrance are established to accept ashes, the ashes are not to be interred in an urn or other vessel, or to be placed in an identifiable (and subsequently plaqued) portion of the garden.

I understand this. After death we let go of the body, consigning it to the inevitabilities of time as we have let go of the person whose time with us on earth has also succumbed to the inevitabilities of time.

Posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd) (# 12163) on :

Thank you, Vulpior. I'd like to think of my remains, whether the decaying corpse, or the cremated remnant, being interred in God's Good Earth without a huge marker above it. Huge monuments don't seem very humble to me.

Posted by Evensong (# 14696) on :

quote:
Originally posted by IngoB:

quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
But after two thousand years in a grave, there aint gonna be much there to resurrect. If anything. Dust to dust, ashes to ashes.....
Ezekiel 37.

Ezekiel 37 had bones to work with.

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :

IngoB - nice rhetoric as ever. As long as it isn't mandatory and exclusive and divisive. As long as it's inclusive. Despite appearences to the contrary. If that all works for you, excellent. I went to a friend's funeral a year ago and as we talked after outside a large flake of his ashes, in the slight, sickly sweet miasma that none of us mentioned, fell on my shoulder.

I was even able to share with his grieving widow that I was VERY much looking forward to telling him in the resurrection that he had rained on me.

That works for me.

Posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd) (# 12163) on :

There seems to be an implicit assumption amongst many posters on this thread that their individual resurrections will be to joy and glory.

My hope is that God's mercy will outweigh his justice. Strangely, I think it usually does, unless you presume on it.

Will I be looking forward to meeting old friends on the "other shore", if I make it to the good place? A lot more actually. Heaven will, I believe, be a state far beyond our wildest fancies and I doubt it will have the equivalent of SOF threads. Why would people need them? Real joy goes far, far beyond attempted verbal description of same.

Posted by hatless (# 3365) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Steve H:

quote:
Originally posted by hatless:
It's not the problem of finding the atoms that bothers me about cremation, it's the ghastly aesthetics of the industrial process (Siemens initially, I believe) coupled with the weird curtain thing. I much prefer grass, mud and weather.
When I pop my clogs, they can chuck me on the compost heap or flog me to McDonald's to make burgers with, for all I care.

The dead don't care, and the grieving don't have to either, but if it was me, I'd prefer not to recycle my loved ones via McDonald's. No method avoids the challenge and absurdity of death, though.

Posted by Zach82 (# 3208) on :

I have heard more than one person expressing horror at the idea of rotting. I rather look forward to my festering juices leaching into the soil.

quote:
Really? Where? [Confused]

Several US states have taken up my acquaintances' horror of putrefaction, and require measures like sealed, airtight coffins or concrete burial vaults under the soil to contain, I imagine, their own impending sense of doom. And the festering juices.

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :

Sir Pellinore (ret'd) [Overused]

hatless

Zach82

(I've been thinking in my early geriatric state about submitting to the dissolution of my health and strength and faculties ... you just took that one step further!)

My youngest has said he will have me turned it to cat litter.

[ 03. June 2012, 14:31: Message edited by: Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard ]

Posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd) (# 12163) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
...

My youngest has said he will have me turned it to cat litter. [/QB]

When my kids were a bit younger and "like that" I wish I had the appropriate wand from Olivander's and the appropriate spell to turn them into kitty litter (temporarily) to teach them "that" lesson.

A little bit of humility would've done them some good at that stage. The young often think they can live forever.

Sadly, those reaching the end of their lives at a fairly advanced age, often seem afraid of what's "on the other side".

When I am really, really old, in my 80s or 90s and it appears "it's almost time", I hope my consciousness is elevated enough by the Almighty to realise death is just a transition and that, deo voluntas, I am going to the place we were all destined for.

Posted by sebby (# 15147) on :

quote:
Originally posted by hatless:

quote:
Originally posted by Steve H:

quote:
Originally posted by hatless:
It's not the problem of finding the atoms that bothers me about cremation, it's the ghastly aesthetics of the industrial process (Siemens initially, I believe) coupled with the weird curtain thing. I much prefer grass, mud and weather.
When I pop my clogs, they can chuck me on the compost heap or flog me to McDonald's to make burgers with, for all I care.
The dead don't care, and the grieving don't have to either, but if it was me, I'd prefer not to recycle my loved ones via McDonald's. No method avoids the challenge and absurdity of death, though.

I don't understand why death is absurd.

Posted by OliviaG (# 9881) on :

I used to like the idea of dying (either by accident or naturally) out in the woods and being recycled by a bear. However, I'm going to have to re-think that, given the consequences for the bear:

Bear pulls corpse from car

I attended a Jewish funeral a few years ago and participated in the collective shoveling. It was very moving. However, if I have any mourners, they will share my desire to be recycled into nature as promptly and efficiently as possible, so cremation and a road trip. OliviaG

Posted by LutheranChik (# 9826) on :

I've told my loved ones that if I kick off I'd like my ashes scattered all along M-22, which runs past the Sleeping Bear Dunes and all around Michigan's Leelanau Peninsula. In the meantime, I stumbled upon a news article about a company that, for a fee, will inter one's ashes right in the dunes area. (I don't know how that's possible in a national park, but I'll take the newspaper's word for it.)

Either way, it'll be a pleasant road trip for the fam. And they have my permission to periodically veer off-course for libations at one of the many wineries on the peninsula.

And this exercise has nothing to do with any denial on my part of a bodily resurrection.

Posted by Barnabas62 (# 9110) on :

Mrs B and I both like the idea of having our ashes scattered on Islay. We celebrated our 40th wedding anniversary there - and saw a golden eagle soar effortlessly into the sky on a bright, sunny, cloudless day. First time either of us had ever seen a golden eagle. A golden moment while celebrating a ruby wedding.

Now that was a prophetic sign ...

The atoms and molecules things is interesting. Dust to dust, ashes to ashes. But the stuff of which we are made, of which everything on earth is made, was "cooked" in stars, unimaginable eons ago.

We are stardust. The sense of awe that natural miracle produces in me helps me not to get too prosaic about the miracle of the general resurrection.

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :

Will resurrected cannibals have shared multiple personalities ?

Posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd) (# 12163) on :

I hope they will be relieved of these before entering the Pearly Gates, Martin.

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :

I've been festering about this for weeks:

From up on high.

IngoB:

quote:
Putting the body to rest in a grave is a powerful sign of one's faith in the resurrection, a direct emulation of what happened to our Lord. Cremating the body is a much less clear sign, to say the least. The RCC did finally allow cremation in the last century, but reluctantly so. She was accommodating those who had great difficulties of the financial and practical kind to make that sign, difficulties that have become much more pressing for people living in ever growing cities.

That God is capable of restoring a body even if it was dispersed all the way to its nuclear constituents nobody doubts. That also sometimes in the past a proper burial could not be given is obvious. But it does not follow that this sign is meaningless, and it is sad to see it dismissed so readily.

because it epitomises (I've gone COMPLETELY Cambridge now, as Oxford are hypocrites) the baroque edifices the The Church aggrandises on top of the simplicity of Christ in so many areas, creating second class Christians at best which causes me to wonder if I will ever encounter Jesus in and from The Church

It's NOT all about The Church.

It's ALL about Jesus. As a wonderful Roman Catholic friend said to me just last night.

And yes I have encountered Him in and from The Church here.

But not recently. Not obviously. As I'm sure it, she hasn't in me.

I don't WANT to attack The Church, please overwhelm me, shame me with the love of Jesus and NOT pre-emptive self-defence.

Posted by shamwari (# 15556) on :

Sometimes I find myself in hearty agreement with Martin. At other times I am enraged. And most of the time I have no idea of what he means.

Would Martin please do us all a favour ( or me at least) to say in plain unvarnished English just what he believes.

Without the esoteric phrases.

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :

Your servant Sir. I'm King Ludwig of Bavaria, chasing his terrified subjects saying, "Love me you scum!".

I want to encounter Roman Catholics and Orthodox and Evangelicals and Liberals here in Christ (whilst not realising that I AM of course ...).

An impossible dream of emergence I'm sure.

That the Kingdom can happen HERE. Among us. ALL.

That we ALL apologise for our funny little ways that we claim are predicated on Jesus but can't transfer and LOVE ONE ANOTHER.

Funny little ways like my acceptance of God the Killer which horrifies you shamwari.

That we no more engage in cultural supremacism.

Am I just too thin skinned ? This is Purgatory after all.

And I'm sorry that the biggest target is a certain dominant type of Ship's Roman Catholic by far, but it is. Typified by this thread. The Orthodox can be just as guilty. And yeah OF COURSE I'm a total hypocrite. So ?

Being pitied, condescended to because I don't 'get' Marianism, transubstantiation, the MAJESTY of The Church for which I should be APOLOGISED to for the dependency on. As sales pitch is DOESN'T WORK in thios market place.

DOES IT ? Anyone ? As apologetic it DOESN'T WORK.

Henri Nouwen works. Mother Theresa Works. Thomas Merton works. The Cloud of Unknowing works. Hildegard of Bingen works. The Cappadocian Fathers work. Thomas a Kempis works. John Donne works. POETS work. Theology and creeds are ... CRAP by comparison. Utter crap.

We are SO frail, SO tenuous, SO incoherent in ourselves, but our narratives of narratives are SO strong.

It HURTS. OK ? It hurts. Sorry.

Posted by shamwari (# 15556) on :

One sentence apart I still dont have the faintest idea of what it is that you actually believe.

Please cut the hyperbole.

I happen to agree with the one sentence I can understand.

Posted by ken (# 2460) on :

Martin makes sense to me.

Posted by shamwari (# 15556) on :

So perhaps Ken can interpret Martin, whom he understands, to those of us who are benighted.

Posted by Trudy Scrumptious (# 5647) on :

quote:
Originally posted by shamwari:
So perhaps Ken can interpret Martin, whom he understands, to those of us who are benighted.

St Paul does assure us that if one speaks in tongues, another should be given the gift to interpret the tongues.

Posted by Desert Daughter (# 13635) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Trudy Scrumptious:
St Paul does assure us that if one speaks in tongues, another should be given the gift to interpret the tongues. [/QB]

Indeed!! Trudy points at a hot iron there...maybe that's another thread, innit?

In the meantime, I buy Ingo's argument on the symbolic power of an earth funeral while being relatively indifferent to what happens to my own mortal shell (as long as they repatriate it out of France...)

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :

'strewth shamwari, WHAT hyperbole? As typified by this thread, some Roman Catholic Christians have a grandiose superiority complex that alienates. OK ?

Posted by Mary LA (# 17040) on :

I get this Martin, it echoes a kind of irrational persisting angst in me.

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :

It isn't irrational Mary LA (LOVE your avatar and its synergy with your 'From:'). This is the first of the five steps to tyranny. Us and them. That will be twisted here. Watch. I have just started Spiritual Freedom by John J. English, S.J. What a beautiful gift from my Grandmother.

A Grandmother who until a month or so ago I had a side bet on as the fount of latter day apostasy, having believed her to be no kin of mine and a LOT worse up until 15 years ago.

I suppose I expect too much of the old girl and her sister, especially in the face of my vilely bad mouthing her for over 30 years. That they LOVE me. That they welcome me with open arms and no extra-canonical hoops to jump through in compulsory weird traditional costumes. The Father has always welcomed me regardless.

Here she appears to have institutionalized grandiose subtype delusional disorder.

Should I JUST be nice to her regardless ? As I should be with my mother ?

Uh OH ! I believe Jesus has just given me the answer ...

Posted by Boogie (# 13538) on :

quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
'strewth shamwari, WHAT hyperbole? As typified by this thread, some Roman Catholic Christians have a grandiose superiority complex that alienates. OK ?

I wish we could have a 'not hell' or 'please explain' place to call people so that they can answer such questions Martin.

Like shamwari, I am both attracted and annoyed by your posts.

They make great poetry, but - like many poems - it isn't always easy to understand what you are getting at.

Posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard (# 368) on :

I know Boogie [Smile]

in our postmodern fellowship here, that's a result. Just read McLaren and Campolo's Adventures in Missing the Point. Superb. They DISAGREE. Under the same metanarrative.

Something beautiful and emergent is happening HERE. With us. I'm beginning to see a way. An inclusive, difficult, brain stretching way. Because it's inclusive.

This is in LARGE part not just due to my belatedly discovering the postmodern to which fifteen years ago I had a neo-Evangelical aversion, but due to being called to work with the homeless and seeing myself reflected and seeing us all reflected, reflecting in Jesus, as Jesus, by, for, of Jesus AS concurrent subfacets of working and dysfunctional, whole and ill, sane and mad in EACH of us (as) facets:

I am a one man Versailles Galerie des Glaces in a Galerie Grander IN a yet Grander IN ... In our Father's house WE are the many mansions.

Posted by Woodworm (# 13798) on :

The reason burning at the stake and hanging-drawing-and-quartering were so abhorrent was that they were thought to deny the victims their bodily ressurection. Many graves in the West face east so that when the buried sit up they will see Christ descending on Jerusalem (their priests face the other way, becasue they are leading their conregations).

I was once told that the word "Collumbarium", the literal translation of whcih is "Dovecote", came to be used for the space for cremation urns in cemetries becasue it was mildly insulting. The Cemetry authorities got more money from burials, you see.

Me, I have always fancied being turned into a leather jacket, so's I can keep going to gigs and parties.

UBB.classic^TM 6.5.0