jump to navigation

Cremation is Implicitly a Negation of the Faith and Always Disordered November 9, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, Basics, catachesis, cultural marxism, error, Four Last Things, General Catholic, Interior Life, Revolution, scandals, secularism, the struggle for the Church, Tradition, Virtue.

So says Father Albert of the traditional Dominicans of Belgium in the question and answer video below from The Fatima Center.

The question as originally asked is a bit on the silly side, asking if God can bodily resurrect those bodies that have been reduced to ashes through cremation. Goodness.  God is the Lord and Creator of the universe, of all that is, was, and ever shall be – if one decided to ride a Mk 17 20 MT nuclear bomb down to initiation a la Colonel Kong in Dr. Strangelove so that not even components of atoms remained after death, God could still resurrect that body.  God’s power is infinitely greater than our puny human acts, and nothing we could possibly do could ever interrupt His Will.

Having said that, on a philosophical, moral, and theological level, there are severe problems with the entire concept of cremation, which is why the Church opposed the practice for centuries.  Indeed, from a standpoint of historical etymology, cremation was first advanced by several anti-Catholic sects during the long history of the Church as a way to deny core Catholic Doctrines, such as the Christ’s Resurrection and Ascension and His role as our unique Savior.

Father expounds at some length on the dual nature of the human person, that of the soul united to the body, and the unique role each plays in man’s natural and supernatural existence. In this present life, the supernatural is more confined to the soul, and initially after death we shall be disembodied souls, but after the general Resurrection, both shall be united and we shall be complete, in a sense, again.  This is the promise revealed to us by divinely inspired and inerrant Scripture, and the constant belief and practice of the Faith. But even more, from a standpoint of logic, man was created by God out of matter to have a physical body, and shall not be complete after death until body and soul are reunited.  Thus, man’s ultimate end cannot be achieved until this Resurrection has taken place.

Note that the increased permission for cremation was tied into the general collapse of moral, theological, and ecclesiastical standards that were ushered in under John XXIII, even before the disastrous Council of the 1960s.  It can never be stated enough, Vatican II was not orchestrated in a vacuum, while much sleight of hand, subterfuge, and even immoral methods may have been used to produce the various approved documents, approved they were, and almost unanimously by thousands of bishops who should have, must have, known better.  Wheels were flying off all over the place even before the first session met.  But of course Vatican II advanced this process immensely, solidified it, and left us with a human element of the Church as broken as it has ever been.

Ranting to the choir, I am.  However, while there were hugely impacting individual elements of the 1960s conciliar revolution, much of the damage to the faith of millions came from a sort of death of a thousand cuts.  Cremation may, taken entirely by itself, not have a huge impact on the belief and practice of many Catholics (at the same time, however, it may well) who opt for it, but as part of a general process of disbelief, rejection of Tradition, and acceptance of cultural mores, it just becomes one more injury to the foundation of faith.  And in the present context, where tens of millions of self-described practicing Catholics are, in actuality, practicing heretics if not outright apostates, this practice can be a warning sign of seriously deranged belief.

I think Father Albert sums it up quite well when he says cremation is implicitly a negation of faith in the bodily resurrection and a dangerous, disordered practice.

So sayeth the shepherd, so sayeth the flock.



1. Baseballmom - November 9, 2017

Wow. I’ve never been comfortable with the practice, but did not know it was so frowned upon. Thanks for this post.

2. Tim - November 9, 2017

A relative had “connections” and sprinkled part of his son’s ashes on the ice of an NHL rink, only to be sucked up by the Zambonie machine. This was after the “Catholic” (Novus Ordo of course) funeral. What sacrilege! Be sure you have your will specifying your burial and Traditional funeral Mass. Also, be sure you have in writing your wishes for not being murdered in a hospice and having a Traditional priest to give you the Sacraments before you lose your ability to be lucid to get maximum grace. Tragically, most of us Traditional Catholics have complete wack job relatives who could make stupid and evil decisions if you don’t make it clear in WRITING

skeinster - November 10, 2017

Good suggestions, but NOT your will. That’s isn’t read until after you are underground…

Better to pre-plan your end-of-life and funeral instructions in specific detail and give copies to all pertinent people.

As the only Catholic in my family, I have asked a good parishioner friend to be my family’s “funeral liason”, to guide them through an unfamiliar process.

And I am entrusting my most sympathetic child with the responsibility for Masses for me after death

Tim - November 10, 2017

True, true……

Sir Louis - November 11, 2017

You are correct. I used the word “will” indiscriminately. The directions for disposition are contained in our trust (the associated will is merely what the lawyers call a “pour over”), and the trustees have been acquainted with those directions in detail — great and exact detail, down to what hymns are to be used, and that under no circumstances whatever is anything by Marty Haugen to be used.

Tim - November 13, 2017

Sir Louis - November 13, 2017

Distinctions have to be made. While it is true that the push for “living wills” is generally rooted in the desire to be able to commit murder of the no-longer-useful and avoid the cost of ordinary terminal care, a health directive set down in advance can be framed so as to instantiate the Church’s teachings and at least attempt to frustrate those who want to kill. My own directive states that nothing is to be done with the aim of shortening my life; that specifically named persons will decide on treatment options when I cannot; that they will consult with physicians but will have the freedom and responsibility to decide, following specific Vatican guidelines, what is ordinary care and therefore cannot be omitted and what is extraordinary and may be foregone if the expected benefit in extending life requires too great a burden, either financial or in pain and suffering, of me, my family, and my estate. The important point is that the decisions are to be made by people I know to be prudent and faithful Catholics, not by EMTs blindly following a yes/no rule, nor by transplant surgeons anxious to get something freshly killed.

Tim - November 14, 2017

Father made the needed distinctions in the sermon.

3. Sir Louis - November 10, 2017

My wife and I have dictated in our wills that we are to be cremated, solely because we will then have our ashes interred in a columbarium in our parish church. Yes, I will undergo cremation so that I can be permanently in a sacred space, close to the Blessed Sacrament night and day, present for every Mass. It would be even better to be interred whole in a crypt under the church. Next best is to be in ashes but still in the precincts of sanctity.

4. Canon212 Update: FrancisDoctrines Against Nuclear Arms, Wars, Guns, and and Executions Are All Part of His Pro-Death, Pro-Evil Platform – The Stumbling Block - November 10, 2017


5. Tim - November 13, 2017

Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: