Vatican Issues Decree on Burial, Cremation, Just Before ‘Month of the Dead’
by Thomas D. Williams PHD Breibart News October 25, 2016
The Vatican has published new guidelines regarding Catholic burial and cremation just in time for Halloween and the beginning of November—the “month of the dead.”
While expressing a preference for Christian burial, the new Instruction makes allowances for those who wish to be cremated, but specifies that their mortal remains cannot be scattered in the air or at sea, preserved in mementos, kept in the home or divided up among family members.
The norms issued by the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith are meant to uphold the importance of the body in Christian theology and to avoid “every appearance of pantheism, naturalism or nihilism” that can be associated with the scattering of ashes, the document states.
November is traditionally celebrated by Christians as the month of the dead, beginning with the back-to-back feasts of All Saints’ Day and All Souls’ Day, the latter being dedicated to praying for the souls of the departed. It also is the last month on the Christian calendar before beginning the new liturgical year on the first Sunday of Advent. Catholics in particular are encouraged to meditate during November on the “eternal truths,” namely death, judgment, heaven, hell and purgatory.
The modern feast of Halloween—“All Hallows’ Eve”—derives from the Christian commemoration of the evening before the Feast of All Saints, celebrated on November 1.
Because of their belief in the resurrection of the body, since the first century Christians have placed special value on respect for the body after death.
“In memory of the death, burial and resurrection of the Lord,” the Instruction states, “burial is above all the most fitting way to express faith and hope in the resurrection of the body.
“By burying the bodies of the faithful, the Church confirms her faith in the resurrection of the body, and intends to show the great dignity of the human body as an integral part of the human person whose body forms part of their identity,” it says.
With regard to cremation, the text states that the Church has no doctrinal objections to the practice, “since cremation of the deceased’s body does not affect his or her soul, nor does it prevent God, in his omnipotence, from raising up the deceased body to new life.”
“The Church continues to prefer the practice of burying the bodies of the deceased,” however, “because this shows a greater esteem towards the deceased. Nevertheless, cremation is not prohibited, ‘unless it was chosen for reasons contrary to Christian doctrine,’” the text reads.
Moreover, when, “for legitimate motives,” cremation of the body has been chosen, “the ashes of the faithful must be laid to rest in a sacred place, that is, in a cemetery or, in certain cases, in a church or an area, which has been set aside for this purpose, and so dedicated by the competent ecclesiastical authority.”
(Now it was brought up earlier today by spinelli. After reading this article I think it was somewhat reasonable. As I had mentioned I had visited a funeral home on Staten Island which was a horrible carnival of death. It was an Italian funeral home and you know that Italians are obsessed by death. Almost as much as the Mexicans. They offered all of these packages to split up the ashes of your loved ones. Vials. Candles. Urns. Lockets. Snuff boxes. It was grim and macabre. Frankly I was shocked. I was used to the funeral home having Mass Cards and some stuff you could buy and donate to the church like vestments and chalices that were given to poor priests in Africa or something. But this was over the top consumerism. They even had video packages to sell that they prepared and showed during the wake. It was unseemly.
I don't think it is wrong for the church to speak out about the misuse of ashes from the dead and that they should be respected. But like human life and other doctrines of the church I expect people to ignore it and do whatever they want. I also don't doubt that they want to dip their beak. They always do. But the basic idea is right. We should respect the mortal remains of the death.
Personally I don't like the idea of cremation. I was at a particularly bad funeral of one of our in laws. We went through the whole process to support them even though they were bat shit crazy. The final scene is you go to the cemetery to the crematorium for a final service and prayer. Well the son went crazy. He was obsessed with the idea that he would be created and that they would put his mom in a cardboard box and resell the coffin. So he gets out his key and goes up and keys all over the coffin stuff like "I Love You Mommy" and "I Will Love You Forever." It was madness. People go crazy with grief and the death industry exploits it to the maximum. It is just horrible.)
(Note the photo is of a crypt in Sicily where the cult of the dead is very much alive.)
31 comments:
Nothing particular to Catholicism, but why do leaders of most faiths make being a member so hard to do? It's almost like they are trying to get rid of you, or at least make you feel bad most of the time. Even the gurus of the hedonistic ones eventually build these stacks of rules that force people to be failed followers or quit. Of course these rules often are not followed by the leaders themselves. This is even true of secularism. There is something about humans that makes us always want to divide people into good ones and bad ones, even when they aren't hurting anyone. From homeowners associations to the Vatican - everybody with the rules on stuff.
There is a pretty easy answer to that bags. Tribalism. It is the entire primeval basis of human existence. The basic unit is of course the family. You makes rules in a family that everyone has to follow or they are excluded. That is how homo sapiens survived. Gradually that sense of rules and obligations extended to a clan. A tribe. A nation.
Religions work in a slightly different way. Many offer an alternative to the family structure. The Catholic Church in particular offered refuge to people who could not be part of their family structure. They offered rules that people wanted. You see very few people don't want rules. They might say that but they really don't mean it. They might claim they are rebels but they adopt the uniform of the family they join. That is why you don't see outlaw bikers in burkas or business suits. It's all tribes/families. Simple.
From homeowners associations to the Vatican
Word up.
A cult is if you're leader is living. A religion is if your leader is dead.
"You don't wear dreadlocks and smoke ganja and bang ho's all day long." Well, two out of three ain't bad.
bagoh20 said...
Nothing particular to Catholicism, but why do leaders of most faiths make being a member so hard to do?
Depends on what you call hard. Following the Ten Commandments really is just being law-abiding. Most religious rules on behavior are the things necessary for an orderly society.
When you figure Christianity's been around 2000 years and Judaism 3750 years before that, you have to figure they've seen what the bad moves are.
Methadras said...
A cult is if you're leader is living. A religion is if your leader is dead.
Too bad Communism didn't die with Lenin.
Anywho, I think it's a little more complicated than that although a religion usually is a belief system that stood the test of time.
Catholicism was never a tribe. It was an empire.
What other force could get Italians and Irish to breed with each other.
I rest my case.
Oh well. It's good to see them focusing on the important things, again.
For those that can't abide regular church rules, there's always Reverend Leroy's Church.
When I was a teen my mum asked me if I was circumcised. What a careless woman. Imagine such an unconcerned woman wiping your little ass and changing your diapers.
"Here, Kid, here's your bottle. Catch." *throws bottle in the general direction of the crib*
"What was it to you, a box that you checked on a hospital form?"
Will your male baby be medically circumcised? (recommended)
☐ Yes
☐ No
☐ Laters
☐ A mohel will do that at his leisure
"If you don't behave I'll make you sit in the car and fold your hands."
How will she know if my hands are folded? *plays with mirror, honks horn, moves the gear shift, pulls emergency brake* On the other hand, those paint chips sure were tasty.
I guess I can respect their guidance on cremains.
But I just don't get why they think "pantheism, naturalism," etc. are such a threat.
What are those things, anyway?
People should be able to define what they stand for, not just what they stand against.
" You don't wear dreadlocks and smoke ganja and bang ho's all day long. That's a different tribe. You don't play your guitar outside the bus station and sleep o on a grate. "
No, but it hasn't been that long. I couldn't make a living at those things, and I like having money, but that's a good description of most of my friends who I do hang with, so that must be my tribe. I sure don't hang with businessmen, entrepreneurs or rich people, yuck! Who wants to do that? What do they talk about: interest rates, insurance and expensive cigars?
Anyway, I gotta go - the ho's are here with my ganja. Bitches wanna hear me play a tune again. It amazing. You can grab 'em by the pussy and get away with it. I love my peeps.
"But I just don't get why they think "pantheism, naturalism," etc. are such a threat."
It is not so much a threat as being the wrong path and something believers should not indulge in. Like all sorts of sins. If you want to be part of the church you have to follow the rules. It is really quite simple. You don't get to pick and choose which ones to follow. I mean you can but if you get caught you might get smacked by a ruler. Just sayn'
Rhythm and Balls said...
Catholicism was never a tribe. It was an empire.
What other force could get Italians and Irish to breed with each other.
Rit, just as they will fight with anybody, they will mate with anybody.
Consider the Black Irish.
Sometimes people make rules about things like stepping on sidewalk cracks.
When younger, I would make sure that if I touched a wall I was walking past, I would have to touch it or an opposite wall the same number of times. Or maybe it was an even number of times. I don't know.
I hear there are other people with my problem. We do not carry rulers however to smack each other with when failing to touch the wall the prescribed number of times.
A Catholic girl I work with said that they used to get hit if they wrote with their left hands. Is that true? Is there a religious reason for making people right-handed?
"You makes rules in a family that everyone has to follow or they are excluded. "
Really? I don't think many families operate that way?
I don't think I have a tribe. I hang with people very different from myself. I have two criteria to hang with you: You must be decent to other people, and I must enjoy your company, period. I don't care what you do for a living, I don't care about race, intelligence, education, wealth, looks, or politics, or even if you are a lazy-ass welfare case who loves big government - which is what I would consider the opposite of me. If I enjoy being with you, and you don't treat people like shit, I can hang with you, and I'd protect you from harm if I can. The fact that you are human is the first strike, but it's pretty hard to strike out with me if you're a decent one. I think tribes are usually an excuse for weak insecure people to treat others badly for no good reason, and to feel like they belong to something without having to work at it.
Rhythm and Balls said...
When younger, I would make sure that if I touched a wall I was walking past, I would have to touch it or an opposite wall the same number of times. Or maybe it was an even number of times. I don't know.
I hear there are other people with my problem. We do not carry rulers however to smack each other with when failing to touch the wall the prescribed number of times.
It's called OCD. You may need help if you have trouble functioning. (for real, no shot)
A Catholic girl I work with said that they used to get hit if they wrote with their left hands. Is that true? Is there a religious reason for making people right-handed?
Happened to a lot of public school kids also.
As far as the Church is concerned, Judas sat to the left of Christ; hence, the evil connotations of the Latin word for left sinister. Never heard of lefties getting hit, but some nuns were people you didn't mess with.
It's called OCD. You may need help if you have trouble functioning. (for real, no shot)
It's just an example, not something I do now. But if I did, well, if the church won't seek help for it, then I won't. Besides, I didn't tell other people to do it.
Never heard of lefties getting hit, but some nuns were people you didn't mess with.
Are there a class of people that Catholicism condones "messing with?"
There is always forgiveness bags. But certain things put you outside the tribe or the family. They are taboos that can not be violated. That has been true since the beginning of human history. It is the violating of these taboos and refusal to hold to a standard of conduct that has gotten us into the mess we are in right now.
I think tribes are the norm for all of human history. They remain vital today if concealed and covered up.
Tribes do help weak people that is true. But strong people benefit a great deal too.
bags mixes up social friends with family. Because that's what your tribe is: family. Doesn't mean you have to like them. Could I go back and spend time with The Zevin Descendants, the tribe descended from my mothers' grandparents? It would be uncomfortable...and comforting at the same time. Friends can be, should be entertaining and challenging. Tribe doesn't need to be either. It's like coming in from the cold.
Tribalism is how the Arab and African world works.
What a model for success.
A lot of people seem to think of the various religions as something other than competing systems of government. I'm not one of them.
This tribalism idea is just not thought out here. It's a feeling in search of a theory.
The United States was founded specifically as a departure from tribalism, and it's one of the basic pillars or American exceptionalism. We left heredity, and blind allegiance based on it to form an open but strong allegiance to ideas and principles that were primarily freedoms from forced tribalism: freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom from the tribe abusing individuals. We specifically raised the rights and freedoms of the individual by limiting the power of the tribe.
A tribe is something you are born into, that you have no right to challenge other than to leave it. I love America because of what it stands for and has been to the world - what it has done in it's history, not because I was born here. I'll leave it if it continues it's descent into tribalism, as soon as a more American place evolves, but what a shame that would be, and how unlikely such a place would ever happen again. It was a miracle the first time, because yes, tribalism is the natural human proclivity, just like murder, rape, selfishness, and greed.
Tribalism is a part of the human (and anthropoid to some extent) nature. Even Chimpanzies have "tribes". They don't know it, don't say it, but it exists even to the extent of waging war of other Chimp groups.
Tribes are like an ever expanding circle of connection. Of course the bigger or farther out the circle is from the core the more tenuous the connection can be.
Family. Husband/Wife (or wives in some cases)
Family + children
Family + children + spouses
Family + children + spouses + their family (now it starts getting tenuous. Not everyone loves their In-laws)
Family + children + spouses +(their family)+ grandchildren
And so on.
Then on a more societal level
Family + neighbors = neighborhood
Neighborhoods = Town
Towns in your region
Your region with others near you
the County
the State
The Country
GOVERNMENT!!!
As we get bigger circles the center may hold but the edges will fray.
The problem that we have now is the the Progressive/Socialist/Communists have decided to destroy the core. Destroy the center and destroy the family unit and try to replace it with power centralized in the the Government. We see the results of this in the inner cities. THIS is the future envisioned by by the liberals.
A tribe is something you are born into, that you have no right to challenge other than to leave it.
Woah..... Bags. Did you miss the 60's? Wait maybe you are too young to remember the Dawning of the Age of Aquarius where the hippies decided that they would make their own tribes. The Magic Mystery Bus? The musical Hair!? Charles Manson and his tribe?
That was the central point of the Hippie movement.
Tribes are what you make them. Sure you are born into a tribe...family, neighborhood but you can disassociate yourself and make a new tribe. Not that this is always a good thing (see.. Manson Tribe) but you certainly can challenge the tribe and make changes. Most people just go along or leave or make their own tribe, but certainly change can happen. Otherwise we would still be sacrificing our children to Baal. Wait....maybe we do still, now in a different manner...We send them to universities to be brainwashed and sacrifice their brains on the altar of political correctness.
"Tribes are what you make them."
Good luck with that. Tribes make you. As soon as you imagine yourself in one, it defines you, and forces you to exclude others, and you become submissive to it's rules, to the tyranny of its leader. All tribes have a chief, who is yours?
All tribes have a chief, who is yours?
My Tribe, the entity to which I owe my total allegiance is pretty small. Spouse and Myself. We take turns being in charge or divide up leadership according to our skills. We do have some close friends who may be considered a part of our tribe, but the allegiance is nebulous. We will help each other but do not "owe" anyone anything. If my immediate family were to be in dire straits I would also help them....IF they asked but I really don't consider them a part of my "tribe". They are grown adults with their own lives.
I suppose if there were a disaster or other catastrophe that the tribe would temporarily be extended to our immediate geographic area, since in reality we are left on our own anyway by the big tribes (State of California or Counties). The purpose of that tribe would be to share (maybe) resources and protect ourselves from invading tribes.
Other than that....I don't have a tribe. I may decide to temporarily affiliate myself with others...BUT only to the extent that my affiliation is a positive for my tribe. Otherwise, they can all go pound sand.
I am with DBQ on this subject, well, not in her tribe, mind you, but a proud individualist. That's what this country is about. Sure, you commies can prattle on about greed and selfishness, but being selfish is part of being an adult individual. I know what is mine and I will protect it. Simple, really, unless one lives in L.A. and bombarded every day with communist messaging, and moreover, is weak-minded enough to fall for that baloney.
Tribalism is what lets people vote for Hillary even though they know she's a known corrupt liar. She is the leader of their tribe, and they must uphold the tribe. These people would vote against even a decent accomplished candidate like they did with Romney. They didn't really think he was a bad guy or would make a bad President. He just was not in their tribe. If he was, they would have loved him.
Tribalism is what makes it impossible for some people to hear criticism of Trump without an emotional reaction. It doesn't matter if it's true or valuable to consider, it violates the tribal taboos.
Tribalism is what allows Blacks to defend people like Michael Brown. They know he was bad guy doing bad things. They saw the video of him assaulting the storekeeper. They know his hands weren't up in surrender. All they care about is that "he was one of them", he was Black, so they will lie to keep solidarity with the tribe.
To put it in simplest terms:
The tribalist needs to know who did it before they can tell you if it's right or wrong.
These people would vote against even a decent accomplished candidate like they did with Romney. They didn't really think he was a bad guy or would make a bad President. He just was not in their tribe. If he was, they would have loved him.
Romney wasn't a decent accomplished candidate. He was incapable of speaking to as many Americans as needed him. He outright thought half the country was a write-off. Is that how you think? His tribe was an elite few, less than a few thousand people at most, who could relate to him. And he thought every one else had the right to die or to fry. What a horrible president he would have been. The money he did make (and how much was inherited, or at least started from dad's networks?) was to put hard-working Americans out of work. This is not leadership in America. If your tribe consists of only those who have been extremely fortunate, and then go on to excluding tons of people who work their asses off for little reward, you aren't fit to run the country. It's amazing that you don't get this; that you can't understand why laying off Americans and outsourcing their jobs is not proper national leadership. But then, maybe the country you'd prefer to flee to doesn't exist for a reason. Interesting that you're not up for moving to one of the countries that takes our outsourced jobs. What don't you like about China, Bags? If you lived there, you'd be even more of an elite bubble dweller than here! I guess that's just not incentive enough. China would be happy to have you. So would Dubai. Plenty of countries that treat their workforce as crappy as you'd like Americans to be able to get away with.
Post a Comment