|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: Against Cremation
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
What harm does it do those who are dead in the flesh but alive in Christ to have their flesh burnt?
I see there are psychological arguments in favour of burial, but FG seems to be saying there is more than that.
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Psyduck
Ship's vacant look
# 2270
|
Posted
(Need to master ETA)
If I were to give my body to medical science (Like they'd accept! ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif) - ooh, that was spooky, the smilie is called "killingme"!) I don't think I'd have or create problems in saying in one context that I was in heaven, or with God, or at least hoped so, and in another context that I was being dissected on a table. Any more than that people create problems for themselves or others say, virtually simultaneously, that grandpa is in heaven, "with me always", or "buried in Prestatyn".
--------------------
The opposite of faith is not doubt. The opposite of faith is certainty.
"Lle rhyfedd i falchedd fod/Yw teiau ar y tywod." (Ieuan Brydydd Hir)
Posts: 5433 | From: pOsTmOdErN dYsToPiA | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Father Gregory
Orthodoxy
# 310
|
Posted
Dear Ruth
I used poetic language but my reasons were theological. So, when I (deliberately) provoked with "holocaust of the dead" I wanted the crematers here to appreciate just a little perhaps the depth of visceral disgust I feel on account of the disrespect for the body and the desacralisation of the same that is involved for me as an Orthodox Christian when contemplating cremation. The theological issues of body - soul dualism are pertinent here and not later "add-ons" to a preconceived practice or cultural aspect. No one (yet) has addressed the theological issues I have raised. If you rule them inadmissible because (allegedly) committal is only about disposal then you have already proved my point about utilitarianism.
To all those who keep on repeating:- "God can resurrect the cremated" .... of course he can! That has never been part of my argument here. God can do anything he pleases. The issue is what WE should or should not do and the basis for that decision. The "more" to which Custard has alluded concerns our actual attitudes to the body and the nature of our Christian hope as expressed in those actions.
Neanderthal man buried his dead with flowers .. we know because archaeology has revealed the pollen residues. This goes back a long way!
[ 23. August 2006, 08:02: Message edited by: Father Gregory ]
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™
Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Mudfrog
Shipmate
# 8116
|
Posted
Quick question here: what should we do about burial at sea, when we know (assume) that the body may be eaten.
(Sorry if anyone has relatives buried this way).
Posts: 8237 | From: North Yorkshire, UK | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Psyduck
Ship's vacant look
# 2270
|
Posted
Burial at sea is as far as I can see entirely biblical (Revelation 20: 13)
There's the story that when Bishop Wand came to the west door of St Paul's to be enthroned as Bishop of London, he rapped on the door with his crozier and it swung open to reveal the clergy of the diocese assembled in the gloom. Some of them were exceedingly venerable, and Wand is supposed to have turned to his chaplain and said "Lo, the see gives up its dead..."
--------------------
The opposite of faith is not doubt. The opposite of faith is certainty.
"Lle rhyfedd i falchedd fod/Yw teiau ar y tywod." (Ieuan Brydydd Hir)
Posts: 5433 | From: pOsTmOdErN dYsToPiA | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Father Gregory:
Neanderthal man buried his dead with flowers .. we know because archaeology has revealed the pollen residues. This goes back a long way!
Just how Neanderthal man makes a christian theological point rather escapes me.
Your line of reasoning is beginning to sound like that of people who eschew modern medicine or psychiatric help on the basis that "supernatural" healing is "better".
I don't see why former generations working out cultural expressions of belief in one way is automatically superior to anything we might formulate today. (Hmm. Somebody said they thought Fr G was really into Judaism. They might be right).
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Father Gregory:
No one (yet) has addressed the theological issues I have raised.
As far as I can make out the theological arguments are all in terms of symbolism.
I don't think it is possible to have a universal understanding of what an act means symbolically.
A white dress is considered the symbol of a bride in some cultures - but not in India. If someone was to arrive at an Indian wedding, and try to persuade everyone that having the mother-in-law wearing a white sari, and the bride wearing a red sari symbolically denied the act of marriage, they would clearly be in error.
It doesn't make sense to enforce one's own understanding of symbolism on anothers process, then announce to them what they are symbolizing.
One person may feel cremation symbolically denies the resurrection. Another may feel it affirms it. Who is right?
The normal approach to conflicts of symbolism is to interpret in the context of the doer.
However, here we have the Orthodox understanding of this symbolism enforced on other peoples actions. The only justification for such a strident position - the idea that a single viewpoint is the "correct" way to interpret symbolism - is the usual problem at the heart of all these discussions.
The overarching, a priori assumption that the Orthodox way is right, ordained by God, supported by Holy Tradition, and that all others are in error. Even symbolically.
[ 23. August 2006, 08:28: Message edited by: mdijon ]
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jane R
Shipmate
# 331
|
Posted
Mudfrog asked: quote:
Quick question here: what should we do about burial at sea, when we know (assume) that the body may be eaten.
This is also a problem with conventional burial, according to the Yorkshire folk song 'Ilkley Moor'
If the worms don't get you, the microorganisms will. So if you're worried about being eaten after you're dead, it's surely better to be cremated.
Jane R
(not bothered either way)
[ 23. August 2006, 08:34: Message edited by: Jane R ]
Posts: 3958 | From: Jorvik | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eutychus
From the edge
# 3081
|
Posted
Here's another anti-cremation argument for you, Fr G: fire risk.
--------------------
Let's remember that we are to build the Kingdom of God, not drive people away - pastor Frank Pomeroy
Posts: 17944 | From: 528491 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Papio
Ship's baboon
# 4201
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Psyduck:
and I don't misrepresent me
Psyduck - thank you for your clarification.
I am still not sure that I agree with you, but I am sincerely sorry that I unintentionally misrepresented you.
![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
--------------------
Infinite Penguins.
My "Readit, Swapit" page
My "LibraryThing" page
Posts: 12176 | From: a zoo in England. | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Papio
Ship's baboon
# 4201
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Father Gregory:
So, when I (deliberately) provoked with "holocaust of the dead" I wanted the crematers here to appreciate just a little perhaps the depth of visceral disgust I feel on account of the disrespect for the body and the desacralisation of the same that is involved for me as an Orthodox Christian when contemplating cremation.
Fair enough, but I honestly don't understand your position. Truly. Sorry.
--------------------
Infinite Penguins.
My "Readit, Swapit" page
My "LibraryThing" page
Posts: 12176 | From: a zoo in England. | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
I agree that dead bodies of people should be treated with respect. So not hung out past sundown, etc. even if notorious criminals.
So medical student pranks are not on, neither is putting ashes in the bin (or worse, as in <i>The Shipping News</i>).
But I don't see what's disrespectful in a funeral, a solemn cremation and interment of ashes.
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Linguo
Ship's grammar robot
# 7220
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Father Gregory:
I know that the buriers here are an endangered minority and that itself is significant for it reflects the lack of confidence in our own Christian tradition when, historically it confronted the cremation movement in the 19th century.
I really feel that the decline in burials in this country is more a reflection of the rising cost of grave space. My grandparents were both buried because there were two spaces in the six-grave layer bought to bury their grandparents. My own parents will almost certainly end up being cremated, because we haven't got any more 'family' grave space and I know neither of them would like me to spend lots of money on such a thing, although my mother has expressed interest in green burial. I think that in some parts of the country at least burial vs cremation is becoming a class thing, because of the cost of burial.
Regarding funerals in crematoria, I've been to some utterly horrific ones, mainly at this place (as an aside, the wall crosses are reversible to suit both Catholic and Church of Scotland sensibilities) and some really great ones, notably at the crematorium which featured in the TV series of The Crow Road, of which I can find no pictures. The worst have been those for non-church folks conducted by the duty minister, including one where the deceased was referred to by the wrong name throughout...
Posts: 997 | From: around and about the place | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Psyduck
Ship's vacant look
# 2270
|
Posted
Papio quote:
Psyduck - thank you for your clarification.
I am still not sure that I agree with you, but I am sincerely sorry that I unintentionally misrepresented you.
I'm so sorry. I wasn't thinking of you! I simply meant that while I was unsure if I was representing Fr G accurately, I knew I wasn't misrepresenting me...
--------------------
The opposite of faith is not doubt. The opposite of faith is certainty.
"Lle rhyfedd i falchedd fod/Yw teiau ar y tywod." (Ieuan Brydydd Hir)
Posts: 5433 | From: pOsTmOdErN dYsToPiA | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
...the usual problem at the heart of all these discussions.
The overarching, a priori assumption that the Orthodox way is right, ordained by God, supported by Holy Tradition, and that all others are in error. Even symbolically.
That's what every single thread Fr G. starts is really about. He just keeps finding new hooks on which to hang the discussion...
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
One person may feel cremation symbolically denies the resurrection. Another may feel it affirms it. Who is right?
You are of course right that cremation needn't deny thre Resurrection, which is why (for example) Anglicans and RCs allow it. But there does seem to be a pretty widespread association, in the UK, at least between cremation and some (generally ill-defined) concept of 'setting the spirit free from the body'. At least that's what I've found on funeral visits etc. as well as in reading the bumpf crematoria and funeral directors put out.
Personally I think burial is a better sign of resurrection hope. I also rather like the idea of the graveyard as a kind of physical extension (however distant) of the church building. It is where we can go to be with the Church Expectant. It is where we visit on All Souls Day etc. I also think contemporary religion needs reminding at every turn that we human beings are not really spirits who, accidentally, 'have' bodies. We are animals. Our bodies make us what we are. Which is why, is we are to be raised at all, it must be because we are given something like, what St Paul calls, 'spiritual bodies'.
That having been said, I don't think people should be denied (or even strongly discouraged from using) an option the Church allows them. The major reason many people don't go for burial is the sheer cost of the exercise, sadly.
[ 23. August 2006, 11:14: Message edited by: Divine Outlaw Dwarf ]
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:
But there does seem to be a pretty widespread association, in the UK, at least between cremation and some (generally ill-defined) concept of 'setting the spirit free from the body'. At least that's what I've found on funeral visits etc. as well as in reading the bumpf crematoria and funeral directors put out.
I've never come across that - although I can imagine it existing, and I've only been to a handfull of funerals in the UK, and never read a crematorium brochure.
But one can imagine equally erroneous concepts being attached to burial, surely?
quote:
Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:
That having been said, I don't think people should be denied (or even strongly discouraged from using) an option the Church allows them.
I guess most would consider this to be a bridge too far, then?
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
I guess most would consider this to be a bridge too far, then?
From the article:
quote:
The graveyards in the capital, Athens, are already full to overflowing. For many a burial plot is only rented for three years before the body has to be exhumed to make way for the next coffin.
It can be extremely distressing for relatives. Sometimes the exhumed bodies have not fully decomposed.
Yeah, I consider that to be a bad thing.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
I'd also consider the church denying funeral rites to anyone cremated a bad thing.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
Well, indeed.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
I am not a member of the Orthodox church, and do not feel entitled to criticise their local liturgical customs.
Problems with land for cemetries, in the UK, and probably in Greece, issue from land prices. These are the fault of capitalism, not of the practice of any particular Church!
Of course, however, I think that there should not be State bans on cremation, whatever the practice of any particular religious group.
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
What happens to the exhumed bodies? Are they cremated at that point?
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Psyduck
Ship's vacant look
# 2270
|
Posted
DOD: quote:
These are the fault of capitalism,
At last! Yes!!! It's all the fault of capitalism!
--------------------
The opposite of faith is not doubt. The opposite of faith is certainty.
"Lle rhyfedd i falchedd fod/Yw teiau ar y tywod." (Ieuan Brydydd Hir)
Posts: 5433 | From: pOsTmOdErN dYsToPiA | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
Well, in this case I think it is. Other things are not. Even capitalism cannot be held fully responsible for either Jim Davidson or Pop Tarts.
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
What happens to the exhumed bodies? Are they cremated at that point?
Apparently not. If only the bones are left, they get stacked in ossuaries, which require less space to store the bones.
If they haven't properly decomposed (and I understand 3 years is cutting it a little fine), they get reburied in a shallowish grave, to decompose a bit further.
A relative is required to be present at the exhumation to confirm the process.
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Aggie
Ship's cat
# 4385
|
Posted
In Spain the dead are usually "buried" in columbarium/burial niches. The niches are leased for a minimum of 10 years, although some are leased/rented for longer. After which, the remains are exhumed, and usually cremated. In the olden days, the remains would have put in an ossuary.
--------------------
“I see his blood upon the rose
And in the stars the glory of his eyes,
His body gleams amid eternal snows,
His tears fall from the skies.”
(Joseph Mary Plunkett 1887-1917)
Posts: 581 | From: A crazy, crazy world | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Psyduck:
This is the point at which I have to state - yet again - that I have absolutely no problems with people who have a principled, or even a genuinely emotional, preference for cremation. My point is that the enormous social pressures in favour of the normalization of cremation are deeply linked to social pressures for the sanitization of the whole business of dying, and in favour of conforming our whole human existence to the demands of consumer capitalism. Even people whose deep personal preference is for burial find themselves carried along by the instrumental-rational logic of this. Because our society and culture isn’t about a tiny degree of extravagance in our expression of grief; it’s about colossal extravagance in conspicuous consumption and built-in obsolescence (now there’s a concept you could apply to modern views of death!) and the play of desire through advertising. Everything is commodified, including death. You get your twenty prettified minutes, and that’s it. After death comes closure.
Yes, yes, yes. We understand that; we just think you're wrong. You've made a mistake in your reasoning. We wonder why you're conflating "commodity" with "cremation." They have nothing to do with one another. As has been stated on this thread, many, many ancient cultures cremated their dead.
Burial vs. cremation isn't the point at which "the sanitization of the whole business of dying" occurs. Cremation is, as I've said before, even more intense than burial; it emphasizes death and destruction as burial does not. Even Gregory would agree with this, I suspect, since he compares it directly with abortion.
The cultural problem with death, IMO, comes before the burial/cremation; it comes in the fact that people don't see the bodies of their loved ones as they die, or after they're dead. And that happens because we don't have extended, local families anymore.
But people can certainly say goodbye to the body of their loved one, in the hospital where the death occurs, or at home (except, of course, in cases such as jlg and others have talked about here). They can kiss the body, speak to it, handle it in any way they wish; I did this with my father. I sat with my mother and held her hand as she died at home. What does burial vs. cremation have to do with any of this?
If you're suggesting that people are using cremation as a "quick-disposal" process, I again think you're very wrong. They are using it as a rational response to an urban environment where there isn't anywhere near as much room to bury people any longer. And since the outcome is the same - ashes to ashes, dust to dust - they say that cremation makes more sense.
Everybody suffers grief at the death of their loved ones - sometimes for the rest of their lives. To suggest otherwise is simply silly.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
Everybody suffers grief at the death of their loved ones - sometimes for the rest of their lives. To suggest otherwise is simply silly.
That is simply not true, if by 'suffer' we mean a conscious process. People can, and, do repress grief , spending the rest of their lives in denial, to the detriment of their mental health.
[ 23. August 2006, 14:08: Message edited by: Divine Outlaw Dwarf ]
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
(What I'm really finding amazing about this thread is that Gregory is now literally following us to the grave in order to scold us about what we're doing wrong. Our Christianity is once again suspect, this time because we're not taking our leave of this world properly and according to spec.
Unbelievable!)
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
Everybody suffers grief at the death of their loved ones - sometimes for the rest of their lives. To suggest otherwise is simply silly.
That is simply not true, if by 'suffer' we mean a conscious process. People can, and, do repress grief , spending the rest of their lives in denial, to the detriment of their mental health.
Yes. Q.E.D.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Firenze
Ordinary decent pagan
# 619
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mdijon:
If they haven't properly decomposed (and I understand 3 years is cutting it a little fine), they get reburied in a shallowish grave, to decompose a bit further.
A relative is required to be present at the exhumation to confirm the process.
That seems to me hideously distressing. What if, due to a lifetime of imbibing retsina, they refused to adequately biodegrade?
And 3 years! I remember listening to something about the excavation of the crypt under Christ Church, Spitalfields - where the last burial was something like 1853 - and even hardened archeologists found it tough going.
Posts: 17302 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
[Q] Q.E.D.
Well, only if by 'everybody' you meant 'some people'.
I do think there is a problem with acknowledging death in Anglophone culture. I think it is probably theologically rooted. It is evident not only in the way some people deal, or fail to deal, with the death of loved ones but also in euphemistic talk about death, macho attitudes towards medicine (fighting for every day of life at any cost) and a more general disavowal of our embodiedness. I imagine that some people do view cremation as a 'quick way' through the experience of the death of a loved one, though I think it would be foolish to generalise.
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:
though I think it would be foolish to generalise.
Quite. I expect some people view burial as an inherently morally superior option, but, as you say, it would be foolish to generalise.
(PS, I expect that what TubaMirum means by "QED" is that "the detriment of their mental health" does sound rather like suffering". I suppose you could quibble as to whether it is grief...)
[ 23. August 2006, 15:07: Message edited by: mdijon ]
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
[Q] Q.E.D.
Well, only if by 'everybody' you meant 'some people'.
No, I meant that everybody suffers. You made the point that some suffer through repression, and I agreed.
Anyway, that has, again IMO, really nothing to do with cremation per se, either emotionally or theologically. I'm objecting to the linkage being made here, as I think it's faulty.
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
You made the point that some suffer through repression, and I agreed.
Not I didn't. I explicitly said that we could only say that if we conceded that we need not be conscious of 'suffering', which I suggest is not the ordinary language use of the word. People can be in denial and/ or have resultant mental health issues without suffering at the conscious level one jot. Indeed it is arguable that repression is a tactic against certain types of suffering.
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Scot
Deck hand
# 2095
|
Posted
quote:
Posted by Gregory:
No one (yet) has addressed the theological issues I have raised.
I've reviewed your posts, but I'm having trouble identifying any significant theological issues. All I find are some unsupported claims that incineration is somehow fundamentally more violent and disrespectful than putrefaction and some even more implied claims that your tradition is more correct than everyone else's traditions.
Perhaps you could help me by briefly restating the theological (as opposed to cultural or aesthetic) issues?
--------------------
“Here, we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it.” - Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 9515 | From: Southern California | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
TubaMirum
Shipmate
# 8282
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Divine Outlaw Dwarf:
quote:
Originally posted by TubaMirum:
You made the point that some suffer through repression, and I agreed.
Not I didn't. I explicitly said that we could only say that if we conceded that we need not be conscious of 'suffering', which I suggest is not the ordinary language use of the word. People can be in denial and/ or have resultant mental health issues without suffering at the conscious level one jot. Indeed it is arguable that repression is a tactic against certain types of suffering.
"To the detriment of their mental health" implies suffering, to me.
But this has nothing to do with cremation at all, so must we go on and on about it?
Posts: 4719 | From: Right Coast USA | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
No it doesn't, I can be quite happy and absolutely insane.
But no, it doesn't, so we mustn't.
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
barrea
Shipmate
# 3211
|
Posted
When I was young I think that some Christians were against cremation but I never hear of of it these days,in fact I have known several evangelicaL Christians who have chosen to be cremated in the last few years.
For myself I think both ways are horrible. i hate to think of perhaps waking up after burial or waking up in the coffin while being burnt.
I wish that there was some other way to go, but apart from donating your body to medical reasearch there dosn't seem much option.
I should have ignored this thread it just makes me feel morbid. I supose that is becaise I am older than most of you,
--------------------
Therefore having been justified by faith,we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.
Romans 5:1
Posts: 1050 | From: england | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Father Gregory
Orthodoxy
# 310
|
Posted
Dear Scot
Do I just have to accept from you that the theology is not "significant" or would you care to explain why you take that view?
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™
Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Scot
Deck hand
# 2095
|
Posted
I'm also having trouble identifying your insignificant theological issues, but I didn't want to waste your time by asking you to restate those. I thought we could stick to the big ticket items, whatever they might be. In the interest of clarity, I withdraw the qualification.
Please restate the theological (not cultural or aesthetic) issues that you are raising without regard to their relative significance.
--------------------
“Here, we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it.” - Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 9515 | From: Southern California | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
Fr Gregory, I don't see that your theological issues are strongly connected to the burial practices you prefer. Symbolic meanings are not natural and necessary, and they can change, not to mention vary by culture (see mdijon's example of colors appropriate for weddings above). I'm not dismissing your theology; I'm saying we can change the symbolism and have the same theology.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
Herodotus tells us that King Darius of Persia called before him some Greeks who, in those days, cremated their dead, and asked them what they would accept to eat their dead. They got terribly upset. He then called before him some Callatians, who ate their dead, and asked them if they would consider burning their dead. They got terribly upset.
Herodotus concludes that impiety is in the eye of the beholder: "For if one were to offer men to choose out of all the customs in the world they would examine the whole number, and end by preferring their own; so convinced are they that their own usages far surpass those of all others".
I must say that there are moments when I think he has a point.
[ 23. August 2006, 18:00: Message edited by: Callan ]
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Father Gregory
Orthodoxy
# 310
|
Posted
Dear Scot and Ruth
Cremation involves ACTIVE destruction of the deceased's body by humans. (It wouldn't matter for this argument whether this destruction was by fire, explosion or by a big mincing machine).
ACTIVE destruction of remains by humans assumes that the deceased's body is deserving of no special respect which, contrastingly, would be indicated by committal without HUMAN violence.
That the body of the deceased can be ACTIVELY destroyed does injury to the Christian doctrine that human physicality has permanent value in:-
(1) The creative purpose of God. (The "good" of Genesis).
(2) The assumption of our flesh in the Incarnation. The myrrh-bearing women were equippped to anoint the body of Jesus ... not burn it.
(3) The hope of resurrection.
This injury is a "denial by act" in relation to the body. I am not talking about soul or spirit since crematers seem to ascribe some preferential aspect to these - but this is not what I understand by the resurrection.
This denial-by-act is at best dualistic ... at worst, gnostic. In any event it would be wrong to characterise this as merely symbolic or cultural. It is an anti-theology by deed. The psychological and societal ramifications are pernicious but derivative.
The best way to roll back cremation is to present authentic Christianity as "with the body" - ALWAYS subsisting that is; in life, in death and after death - not in spite of it. God having take our flesh to himself forever enhanced status and character of that flesh (beyond even its existing high status in Judaism) whether or not it is now recognised by humans themselves.
That Christians should not now see this is, to me, most sad.
[ 23. August 2006, 18:24: Message edited by: Father Gregory ]
--------------------
Yours in Christ
Fr. Gregory
Find Your Way Around the Plot
TheOrthodoxPlot™
Posts: 15099 | From: Manchester, UK | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Father Gregory:
(1) The creative purpose of God. (The "good" of Genesis).
(2) The assumption of our flesh in the Incarnation. <snip>
(3) The hope of resurrection.
Of course other things Christians do deny these. Complicity in oppression and exploitation, for example.
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dan the Man
Apprentice
# 11768
|
Posted
quote:
Apart from the Orthodox ... does anyone here think that there is anything to regret in the now widespread Christian acceptance of cremation?
Nope...resurection is that of the soul, and as for re-united with your body, if everyone returned to whats left of their body, many people wouldn't be best pleased (apart from the fact that their in heaven ![[Smile]](smile.gif) )
--------------------
And it was goood
Posts: 34 | From: Leicestershire | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Divine Outlaw
Gin-soaked boy
# 2252
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Dan the Man:
Nope...resurection is that of the soul
Not in an orthodox Christian understanding, it's not*.
In any case, on a purely rational basis, I'm not sure I think that the idea of a non-embodied human being is coherent. It's a bit like talking about a non-mammalian horse, isn't it?
We do not, acidentally, have bodies. We are bodies. As Elizabeth Anscombe once put it, I can truthfully poke myself and say, 'this is me'.
*Incidentally, you list yourself as a 'Catholic' on your profile. The view you espouse is explicitly condemned as heresy by the Roman Catholic Church.
[ 23. August 2006, 18:46: Message edited by: Divine Outlaw Dwarf ]
--------------------
insert amusing sig. here
Posts: 8705 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Scot
Deck hand
# 2095
|
Posted
Gregory, it seems a bit odd to say that burning a body is active while burying it is not. The more important point, however, is that you don't explain why activity or passivity is a theological issue. You state it as fact that "Active destruction of remains by humans assumes that the deceased's body is deserving of no special respect which, contrastingly, would be indicated by committal without HUMAN violence." This assumption is nothing more than a cultural preference. Cultures other than yours would say just the opposite.
You claim that active destruction of remains is somehow an offense against the creative purpose of God. I say that deliberately isolating human remains from the cycle of decay and growth is a a clear denial of God's will as expressed in nature.
You say that cremation denies the value of physicality as shown by the incarnation and the women's anointing of Jesus's body. I say that you are mistaking historical context for principle.
Your argument that cremation denies hope of resurrection runs counter either to science or the claim that God is omnipotent. If we understand that matter does not vanish and if we assume that God can resurrect whomever he chooses, then your argument is completely spurious.
Since none of your claimed injuries to doctrine have any substance, then your claim that cremation is "anti-theology by deed" is unfounded. It is nothing more than an attempt to rationalize a cultural or aesthetic preference by using a narrow set of traditions to tie the preference to broader theological themes.
--------------------
“Here, we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it.” - Thomas Jefferson
Posts: 9515 | From: Southern California | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
