Recently, a friend wrote and asked about the Catholic
practice of "praying for the dead" closely linked to the
doctrine of Purgatory. I answered and did not send this out. Today,
another person asked the same question, so I thought I should send
this out.
Prayer for the Dead
Thanks for your questions concerning this practice. I will divide
the email into a couple components:
1. The case FOR prayer for the dead from the Catholic perspective:
I submit this based on writings I believe to be very consistent with
Catholic contemporary theology, and want to represent it fairly without
comment in this section. I used liberally the Catholic Encyclopedia
and a number of articles I could quickly put my hands on. I hope they
are clear and helpful.
2. My best response as to why I DO NOT pray for the dead: Here I want
to be careful to be gracious, since I believe that God is very much
at work in many churches and theologies, not simply my own. I believe
strongly what I believe, and will try to back it up Biblically, but
I do not want to be "in the face" of anyone. People are
not simply their subgroup "Catholics" or "Protestants",
they are people that God loves and Jesus died for. I trust my words
will carry a spirit of Grace.
I. THE CASE FOR PRAYING FOR THE DEAD
The teaching of prayer for the dead is historically linked to the
teaching concerning Purgatory. The growth of both teachings are
based on:
1. The teaching of the "communion of the saints" found
in the Apostle's Creed and other historical writings of the church.
The Catholic approach to these words is that they are the "unity
of all believers, both in Heaven, Purgatory and earth". In
other words, we have early references in church history that believers
are linked together. Their best understanding of that includes those
in eternity, and they include those in Purgatory because they have
accepted the idea of "another chance" to follow God after
physical death.
2. The teaching of Purgatory, which states that people will be
again give the chance to "work through" the issues they
could not on the earth. It relies heavily on the idea that God accepts
one on the basis of their work for him. Note the Council of Trent
that said: (Sess. XXV), "that purgatory exists, and that the
souls detained therein are helped by the suffrages of the faithful,
but especially by the acceptable sacrifice of the altar". A
good word on this is found in the teaching of Michael Palaeologus
at the Second Ecumenical Council of Florence in 1439: "[We
define] likewise, that if the truly penitent die in the love of
God, before they have made satisfaction by worthy fruits of penance
for their sins of commission and omission, their souls are purified
by purgatorial pains after death; and that for relief from these
pains they are benefited by the suffrages of the faithful in this
life, that is, by Masses, prayers, and almsgiving, and by the other
offices of piety usually performed by the faithful for one another
according to the practice [instituta] of the Church".
Note: Catholic theologians DO TEACH that some go to Hell without
the possibility of redemption in Purgatory: "To those who die
in willful, unrepented mortal sin, which implies a deliberate turning
away from God as the last end and ultimate good of man, Catholic
teaching holds out no hope of eventual salvation by a course of
probation after death. Eternal exile from the face of God is, by
their own choice, the fate of such unhappy souls, and prayers are
unavailing to reverse that awful doom. This was the explicit teaching
of Christ, the meek and merciful Saviour, and the Church can but
repeat the Master's teaching." (Catholic Encyclopedia)
3. The "suffrages" for the dead are defined as formal
supplications (prayers), and works by the living that may be offered
for the spiritual benefit of those who have died. In other words,
the Catholic church teaches that I can both pray for the dead and
work to help them get from Purgatory to Heaven quicker.
Catholic theologian offer the following evidence for the practice
(though since it was agreed to at a church council and supported
by the Papacy, there is little need to "defend" the idea
as such. The evidences cited are:
1. The Bible: The Catholic Encyclopedia says
" As we shall presently see, there is no clear and explicit warrant
for prayers for the dead in the Scriptures recognized by Protestants
as canonical, while they do not admit the Divine authority of extra-Scriptural
traditions. Catholics are in a better position." In other words,
the teaching is not found explicitly in the Bible books that all accept,
it is derived from Apocryphal books of the Bible that are not universally
accepted as God's Word. The Catholic Church teaches these books are
valuable and deem the words regarding prayer for the dead to be true.
2. Arguments from Apocryphal Scripture (2 Maccabbees): Omitting
some passages in the Old Testament which are sometimes invoked, but
which are too vague and uncertain in their reference to be urged in
proof (v.g. Tobias, iv, 18; Ecclus., vii, 37; etc.), it is enough
to notice here the classical passage in 2 Maccabees, 12:40-46.
When Judas and his men came to take away for burial
the bodies of their brethren who had fallen in the battle against
Gorgias, "they found under the coats of the slain some of the
donaries of the idols of Jamnia, which the law forbiddeth to the Jews:
so that all plainly saw, that for this cause they were slain. Then
they all blessed the just judgment of the Lord, who had discovered
the things that were hidden. And so betaking themselves to prayers,
they besought him, that the sin which had been committed might be
forgotten...And making a gathering, he [Judas] sent twelve [al. two]
drachms of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the
sins of the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection
(for if he had not hoped that they that were slain should rise again,
it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead), and
because he considered that they who had fallen asleep in godliness,
had great grace laid up for them. It is therefore a holy and wholesome
thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins."
Passing over the well-known passage, I Cor., iii,
14 sq., on which an argument for purgatory may be based, attention
may be called to another curious text in the same Epistle (xv, 29),
where St. Paul argues thus in favor of the resurrection: "Otherwise
what shall they do that are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise
not again at all? Why are they then baptized form them?" Even
assuming that the practice here referred to was superstitious, and
that St. Paul merely uses it as the basis of an argumentum ad hominem,
the passage at least furnishes historical evidence of the prevalence
at the time of belief in the efficacy of works for the dead; and the
Apostle's reserve in not reprobating this particular practice is more
readily intelligible if we suppose him to have recognized the truth
of the principle of which it was merely an abuse. But it is probable
that the practice in question was something in itself legitimate,
and to which the Apostle gives his tacit approbation. In his Second
Epistle to Timothy (i, 16-18; iv, 19) St. Paul speaks of Onesiphorus
in a way that seems obviously to imply that the latter was already
dead: "The Lord give mercy to the house of Onesiphorus"
-- as to a family in need of consolation. Then, after mention of loyal
services rendered by him to the imprisoned Apostle at Rome, comes
the prayer for Onesiphorus himself, "The Lord grant unto him
to find mercy of the Lord in that day" (the day of judgment);
finally, in the salutation, "the household of Onesiphorus"
is mentioned once more, without mention of the man himself. The question
is, what had become of him? Was he dead, as one would naturally infer
from what St. Paul writes? Or had he for any other cause become separated
permanently from his family, so that prayer for them should take account
of present needs while prayers for him looked forward to the Day of
Judgment? Or could it be that he was still at Rome when the Apostle
wrote, or gone elsewhere for a prolonged absence from home? The first
is by far the easiest and most natural hypothesis; and if it be admitted,
we have here an instance of prayer by the Apostle for the soul of
a deceased benefactor.
3. Arguments from Church Tradition: The traditional
evidence in favour of prayers for the dead, which has been preserved
-
in monumental inscriptions (especially those
of the catacombs): We find in those places inscriptions written on
behalf of the dead ones that say things like "May the dead one
have peace, the good (i.e. eternal salvation), light, refreshment,
life, eternal life, union with God, with Christ, and with the angels
and saints". Catholic theologians interpret these as prayers
for the dead ones.
in the ancient liturgies: Some writings of the eastern Church
from the first five centuries contain "the commemoration of the
faithful departed in the Mass, with a prayer for peace, light, refreshment
and the like, and in many cases expressly for the remission of sins
and the effacement of sinful stains". The following, from the
Syriac Liturgy of St. James, may be quoted as a typical example: "we
commemorate all the faithful dead who have died in the true faith...We
ask, we entreat, we pray Christ our God, who took their souls and
spirits to Himself, that by His many compassions He will make them
worthy of the pardon of their faults and the remission of their sins"
(Syr. Lit. S. Jacobi, ed. Hammond, p. 75).
in Christian literature generally, "Acta
Joannis", composed about A.D. 160-170, that at that time anniversaries
of the dead were commemorated by the application of the Holy Sacrifice
of the Mass (Lipsius and Bonnet, "Acta Apost. Apocr.", I,
186). The same fact is witnessed by the "Canons of Hippolytus"
(Ed. Achelis, p. 106), by Tertullian (De Cor. Mil., iii, P. L., II,
79), and by many later writers. Tertullian also testifies to the regularity
of the practice of praying privately for the dead (De Monogam., x,
P.L., II, 942). There are numerous other examples of the practice.St.
Chrysotom does not hesitate to speak of it as a "law laid down
by the Apostles" (Hom., iii, in Philipp., i, 4, P.G., LXII, 203).
In the final analysis, the Catholic theologian
defends the practice on the basis of 2 Maccabbees, Jewish tradition,
funeral monuments, and the practice of the church of the past. They
do NOT cite the practice as specifically Biblical, but that is of
no consequence. The Catholic church holds to an equal authority for
the Church Councils to that of the written Word. In other words, there
are multiple authorities: The Papal Edict; The Bible; The traditions
of the Church. All of these are the effective basis for truth.
II. MY REASONS FOR NOT PRAYING FOR THE DEAD
1. I do not subscribe to the view that church tradition is an authority
equal to that of the Bible. The same church authorities mentioned
above clearly were both used of God on some occasions and terribly
wrong on others. One need only look at the words of Church councils
concerning Anti-semetism and Jewish hatred to illustrate they were
not always right.
2. Jewish tradition, despite the claim of the Catholic theologians,
does NOT support prayer for the dead. Ask any rabbi, he will tell
you that these were collective prayers for the "children of Israel"
as in the case of 2 Maccabees, not specific prayers for those who
died. Such a practice was very foreign to Hebrew thinking and cannot
be supported in the Talmud or Mishnah.
3. The Bible doesn't teach this. If it were an important doctrine,
truly able to help those who passed on to alleviate their pain and
suffering, would it not be a prominent teaching somewhere in an Epistle?
Why is their no clear command anywhere in Scripture to do it if it
is of any importance?
4. The funerary monuments only show what people hoped for their loved
ones. They should not be seen as having any authority in doctrine,
they were words of grieving family members.
5. Ancient liturgies included a number of practices that were not
in harmony with the Scripture. Coming out of the first century there
was not one Christianity, there were Christianities in various communities,
some not very harmonious with the teachings of the Word. In other
words, because they are OLD words, does not mean they are CORRECT
words. Something is judged true doctrinally, in my view, if it is
found in the timeless truths of the Scriptures.
Hope that helps, R