Addressing this subject, C.S. Lewis said it best: "You're dead! I'm not gonna run errands for you!"
I recently expressed to a friend and brother in Christ my concern about the earth running out of room for graves. Now that airtight concrete vaults surrounding the casket are mandatory in most places, graves take up more room than they used to. I think that someday, if the planet lasts long enough, mandatory cremation might be put into law, for no other reason than there will simply be no more room to bury physical remains the way they're buried presently. If not cremation, some other alternative means will be put into law for the lack of grave space.
My friend mentioned that he wouldn't want to be cremated, "for theological reasons." I didn't ask him about it, because we were in a pizzeria, and too much corpse talk might offend anyone within earshot who was trying to eat. But later, I looked up what kinds of concerns other Christians might have about cremation, and even donating one's body to medical science. I happened upon an article by John Piper. Given that my friend is a Calvinist, and John Piper is to Calvinists what Les Claypool is to aspiring bassists, I decided to read Mr. Piper's thoughts on cremation to better understand my friend's objections.
Mr. Piper was very much against Christians allowing their bodies to be cremated, citing the integrity of the human body, and the fact that the Scripture instructs Christians to care for it; after all, 1 Corinthians 6:19 tells us "Do you not know that your bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own". This is absolutely true. Scripture teaches us that it is wrong to disrespect one's live body - a temple - by immoral actions such as sexual promiscuity, drugs, nicotine, over-indulgence in alcohol, and other harmful things. Mr. Piper also quotes 1 Corinthians 15:37, 42-44: "What you sow is not the body that is to be, but a bare kernel, perhaps of wheat or of some other grain...So is it with the resurrection of the dead. What is sown is perishable; what is raised is imperishable. It is sown in dishonor; it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness; it is raised in power. It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body."
But, nowhere in these verses, nor elsewhere in Scripture, do I find any suggestion that the destruction of one's remains after their soul - and the Holy Spirit - have left that physical temple violates God's command to care for the health and sanctity of one's living body. And I find no instruction for doing all one can to make sure his or her body is intact after death, to be better presentable for its resurrection.
Let's look at what happens to the body after death, without cremation:
1. You're eaten by worms and maggots.
This may not be so much of a problem now, with concrete vaults and embalming (we'll get to that), but it wasn't terribly long ago that, unless you were a President or monarch given your own tomb, a flimsy wooden casket held an un-embalmed body, with no underground vault, both of which were destined to rot underground. Mr. Piper states that the Bible often associates fire with hell and punishment. But it also associates worms and rotting with punishment - "And they will go out and look on the dead bodies of those who rebelled against Me; the worms that eat them will not die, the fire that burns them will not be quenched, and they will be loathsome to all mankind" (Isaiah 66:24). Jesus also references this passage in the ninth chapter of the Gospel according to Mark.
It seems to me that, if being turned to ashes is an insult to the temple of God, then so would worms playing pinochle on your snout. But, again, the physical body is perishable - we will be raised with imperishable bodies, and the decay of the ones in which we labor on the earth does not affect that truth.
2. You're embalmed - a ghoulish process:
Embalming did not become a widespread practice in America until sometime after the death of President Lincoln. His body was embalmed so many times due to its long train trip to its final resting place that it was exceptionally well-preserved. Many mourners who saw this remarked how wonderful the President looked post-mortem, and many hoped to look just as good when they were dead. Mr. Piper mentions the practices of false religions and their rituals of burning bodies. If cremation shouldn't be encouraged because of similar practices by pagan religions, then neither should being embalmed - the body is being well preserved (albeit minus its major organs and blood, making the term "preserved" a bit loose), much like the Egyptians used to do to their dead (removal of blood included). Pharaohs were entombed with many of their belongings (often including their pets), so they could take them to the afterlife. We know this to be ridiculous, as we cannot take our riches with us into heaven - but that doesn't stop us from placing trinkets and keepsakes into the caskets of our loved ones today, which will go with them into their airtight graves.
As we know, the ancient Egyptians served false gods, and their beliefs were integral to their preservation of certain dead bodies. This sounds a lot like what we do to bodies at funeral homes today. So, does that mean embalming is bad? Of course not. It's unnecessary and kind of dumb, but not a reflection of some pagan influence. Today, most states require a body to be embalmed before it's placed in the ground, save for certain exceptions. So, embalming and its grim process is inescapable in most cases.
Funeral homes remove a body's organs and blood, adorn the body with makeup so that it looks downright plastic and artificial, glue the hands together when placing them across the body, glue the mouth and eyelids shut, and inflate the corpse with chemicals. This doesn't sound very "respectful" to the body, at least in the way Mr. Piper defines it.
3. What about donating my organs or donating my body to medical science?
Mr. Piper addresses this in a follow-up article. He mentions the dissection as being a "seeming indignity." But, as was just explained, similar things are done to bodies that are not donated or cremated. He goes on to mention that, if he were involved in the scientific community, he would discourage cremation of a used cadaver, but also admits he doesn't know what happens to a body once a university is finished with it. The fact is, most, if not all cadavers, are cremated; the ashes are returned to the family if requested, or disposed of in other ways.
Fortunately, however, Mr. Piper acknowledges a world of difference in cremation as a means of hastily disposing of a corpse, and giving one's body or organs for the life of another, which blesses another body with health and life, as a temple should be given. I love Mr. Piper's words concerning the difference between mere cremation and donation: "But when one considers that the aim is the discovery or the improvement of some healing procedure for the body or training of doctors in the healing arts for the body, then those very so-called indignities to the body take on a kind of beauty that, in fact, serves the dignity of the body."
Mr. Piper also mentions the brutal things done to our Lord Jesus during His torture and crucifixion. He states in his first article: "Paul said he hoped to magnify Christ “in my body, whether by life or by death” (Philippians 1:20). Glorifying God is what the body is for — in life and in death." But what Paul was describing by magnifying Christ by death was martyrdom, and suffering for the sake of the Gospel. The context of Paul's words in the first chapter of his letter to the Philippians is important: in verses 12-26, Paul is clearly describing his chains and imprisonment, his physical affliction for Christ being a witness to the abundant and eternal life He's given us by His own suffering and death (Paul expresses similar thoughts in 2 Corinthians 4:7-12). He was not referring to a proper burial - how many Christians beheaded and mutilated for their faith were then given "proper burials" by Nero?
I think one of the underlying reasons many Christians - or anyone, really - balk at the thought of being dissected by medical students is because, to be blunt, it's gross. I think because of the understandable discomfort and "ew" that comes with that notion, many people, not just Christians, prefer to think of their remains being placed under flowers and a peach orchard, and leave it at that. We experience a creepy-crawly feeling when we think of some nervous med student at Texas Tech examining an abnormality in our frontal lobes. I believe Mr. Piper, and many of us, see the issue of post-mortem flesh through a fleshly lens, strange as that sounds: we're offended at the idea of strangers handling our organs, or being burned to ash in a crematorium, because it belies what we think should be done, that which is the comfortable, accepted, traditional norm - casket, burial, tombstone. "That was my spleen, that was my heart!", we think subconsciously (or consciously). "No one should be fiddling with my innards! It's weird!"
Mr. Piper mentions the Scripture calling death a "sleep" of sorts, and links this to the importance of such symbolism in death (see the section "A Symbol For Sowing and Sleeping"). But again, in the First Century, and even until about a hundred-fifty years ago, the body would not stay in such a sleep-like state, due to decomposition. Mr. Piper explains that the people of the Early Church did not know when Christ would return (and many of them expected His Second Coming during their lifetime), so laying a body "to rest" as if in sleep was important. But we know now that Jesus did not return during the First Century, and that the remains of believers buried during that time have long "returned to dust," as they should. Likewise, we today don't know when Christ will return. This factor is another reason that the decomposition of this temple underground does not affect the truth that it will still be raised in glory and imperishable. Likewise for those who have died at sea, or their bodies destroyed in accidents. The scene of the White Throne Judgment, wherein all the dead will be judged, is described by John: "The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done" (Revelation 20:13).
The physical, temporary state of one's remains after death does not affect God's ability to raise them in eternal glory. Yes, our bodies must be treated with respect and preciousness while we are alive, and our physical remains must also be given respect after death. Yes, it matters what we choose to have done to them when we die. The inevitable decay of our remains certainly doesn't negate the fact that God has made our temporary shells the temples of His Holy Spirit. In fact, Paul addresses this to the Corinthians, who had the mistaken belief that the body was a "tomb" that encased the soul, and the spiritual things were what truly mattered. But Paul made it plain to them that the body is precious, should be nourished and cherished, and is a temple of the Holy Spirit.
But the Spirit does not remain in a decomposing body after the soul has departed. Yes, the body is a temple for every believer, but someday this temple gives way, "mortality swallowed up by life," to a permanent and imperishable spiritual body, in the presence of God and the Lamb, who will be the eternal temple in New Jerusalem (Revelation 21:22).
But this earthly, temporary - but precious - temple gives way, no matter how we try to artificially preserve, seal, or mummify it after our physical death:
"In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread
till you return to the ground,
for out of it you were taken;
For dust you are,
and to dust you shall return."
-Genesis 3:19
"Naked I came from my mother’s womb,
and naked shall I return there.
The LORD gave, and the LORD has taken away;
Blessed be the name of the LORD."
-Job 1:21
No comments:
Post a Comment