Why Orthodox Christians Are Not Cremated

Cremation (burning the bodies of those who have died to the point of ashes) is a practice which is being "sold" as a cost-effective, space-conservative alternative to traditional burial of the body. Throughout her history, however, the Orthodox Church has prohibited this practice. But, as in many areas of the Faith, we must take the time to learn why the Church takes such a position. In doing so, we not only grow in our own knowledge of the Lord and His Church, but we are better prepared to answer questions others ask us about our Orthodox Christian Faith.

The following passage is drawn from the Orthodox journal, "Life Transfigured" a publication of the Holy Transfiguration Monastery in Ellwood City, and from "Contemporary Moral Issues" by Father Stanley Harakas.

A Growing Practice & Problem In our country, cremation is increasingly being practiced. In part this is due to the influence of Oriental religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism, and to the rise of neo-paganism. But it is also a result of the eroding of traditional beliefs among non-Orthodox Christians. In many Christian denominations — or at least among their liberal preachers — it is no longer necessary to believe in the "empty tomb, " in Christ’s physical Resurrection. These teachers call the "empty tomb" a myth and reduce all the post-Resurrection appearances of Jesus to merely spiritual experiences. The Orthodox conviction that the Son of God was also truly Man and was raised in His whole human nature — body and soul — explains the Church’s traditional rejection of cremation, a practice which is diametrically opposed to the expectation of the resurrection of the dead in Christ. If the Resurrection is merely a legend or a beautiful metaphor, then as Saint Paul writes, "If Christ be not raised, your faith is in vain" (1 Cor. 15.17)

The Church’s Historical Foundations The Church throughout her entire history has stressed the importance of understanding that Jesus was born with an actual human body with the same attributes and needs of any other human body, which upon being crucified died the same death that every other body has died. Three days later, the Resurrection included His human body. Through all this Jesus makes abundantly clear that the whole of our humanity – body as well as soul – has been called to salvation and eternal life. All of human nature has been raised by Christ’s Ascension to the right hand of the Father. Jesus gave us many proofs of this, but it is seen most clearly in Christ’s appearance to Thomas. In his "Commentary on Saint John," Saint Cyril of Alexandria writes:

"What need was there for the showing of His hands and side, if in accordance with the depravity of some, He did not rise with His own flesh? If He wanted His disciples to believe differently concerning Him, why did He not rather appear in a different and by putting the form of the flesh to shame, draw them towards a different understanding? But it was more important that He show Himself carefully at that time so that they should believe in the future resurrection of the flesh."

Saint Cyril adds that the Body of Christ had to be raised in order to vanquish death and destroy the power of corruption. Christ’s body, which Saint Thomas proved through touching to be real, gives clear witness to the future resurrection of our own bodies.

In God’s Image The human person is created in the image and likeness of God. When we are baptized it is not only the soul which becomes the temple of the Holy Spirit, but also the Body. When we receive Holy Communion, we take the real Body and Blood of Christ into our bodies. In the mysteries of Chrismation and Holy Unction it is our bodies which are anointed with Holy Chrism. Particularly clear proof of the sanctity of the body is given by those saints such as Saints Spyridon, Paraskevi, Savas, Gerasimos and Dionysios, whose bodies remain incorrupt centuries after their physical deaths. The Church knows innumerable accounts of healing occurring upon being blessed with the relics of a saint. These men and women lived the life in Christ so fully that not only were their souls taken to heaven but their bodies retain the sanctity and healing power of the presence of the Holy Spirit.

The Example of Holy Friday The future resurrection of the believer’s soul and body, according to the truth which Christ revealed, dictates the nature of Orthodox traditions concerning the body at death. In an Orthodox funeral, "the mourners gather" as the "myrrhbearers to provide the last ministry to the Christian body in preparation for the Resurrection." Anyone who has attended the Orthodox Great Friday services knows the sequence following Christ’s death: Joseph of Arimethea goes at great personal risk to beg Pilate for the body of Jesus. As our icons show, the Theotokos, Nicodemos, John the Apostle and the Myrrhbearing Women helped Joseph, covering the Most Precious Body with tears.

How We Care for the Body The Church has unequivocally taught since Christ’s Crucifixion that the proper way to treat the dead is a reverent burial of the body in the context of a proper Church funeral and prayers for those who have fallen asleep in the Lord. We sing hymns and psalms to escort the dead on their way and to express gratitude to God for their life and death. We wrap the body in a new shroud, symbolizing the new dress of incorruption the person is destined to receive. We pour myrrh and oil on the body as we do at baptism. We accompany this with incense and candles, showing our belief that the person has been liberated from darkness and is going to the true Light. We place the body in the grave towards the east, denoting the Resurrection to come. We weep in our grief, but not unrestrainedly, as we know what happiness is to come.

The Process of Death "O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?" (1 Cor. 15.55). Death is neither a finality nor it is merely an evolutionary step. The Church in her wisdom commemorates saints on the day they died in this life, calling it their day of birth into eternal life in heaven. A Christian death means eternal life with Christ, where at the Last Judgement body and soul will be reunited and glorified together.

The Bridal Chamber A radiantly beautiful verse from the Orthros of Pascha concerning Christ’s bodily Resurrection from the grave encompasses the blessed hope He has given to each of us, saying: "Today, as from a Bridal Chamber Christ has shown forth from the Tomb and filled the women with joy, saying: Proclaim the glad tidings to the Apostles!"

The Broad Picture Acceptance of cremation, therefore, would represent a radical departure from an established practice for which there seems to be no adequate reason to institute a change. The argument that cemeteries waste space does not stand in a nation as immense as our own, especially when the universality of modern transportation makes burial sites away from urban centers easily accessible. The sky-rocketing cost of burial is not seen at this time as a compelling reason to sanction cremation, for the Church does not ask that funerals be extravagant and costly, but that a certain amount of respect be maintained for the human body that was once the temple of a human soul. Thus the Church, due to a pastoral concern for the preservation of right beliefs and right practice within the Tradition of the Fathers, and out of a sense of reverence for its departed, must continue its opposition to this practice. Each Orthodox Christian should know that since cremation is prohibited by the canons [rules of the Church], those who insist on their own cremation will not be permitted a funeral in the Church. Naturally, an exception occurs when the Church is confronted with the case of some accident or natural disaster where cremation is necessary to guard the health of the living. In these special situations, the Church allows cremation of Orthodox people with prior episcopal permission and only by "economia."

I’m Byzantine rite Catholic, so if I lived in a place where there was a functioning Byzantine rite Catholic church, it would be no problem. Unfortunately, there aren’t many of them, and none around where I live now. So I’ve either got to move or hope the Orthodox and the Catholic churches hurry up and work out their differences before then...hmm, maybe I’ll just hang on until then, that should give me another couple hundred years...

No, I don’t mind a brief overview, either.

But I think there was also something to be said for the sort of “standardization” of funerals. When I grew up in New York, prior to Vatican II, it was normally the custom to bring the body into the church the night before, so it was usually present at the daily mass and in fact sometimes the daily mass was actually the funeral mass. This was often for somebody who had no family - one of hte many solitary old people who lived alone in single rooms in parts of Manhattan.

To me, there was always something dignified and solemn about this soul, whom none of us at the mass had probably known in life, being “sent forth upon his journey” at the mass, a solitary, somewhat marginal person being treated with the same respect that everybody else who had families and mourners got.

The coffin was usually open and I remember standing on line next to the it while I waited to go to Communion and looking at this person and saying a prayer for him. It was nice to think that we were all saying prayers for him and his face was being seen for one last time. Then they would close the coffin.

Don’t know if this makes any sense, but that was how I felt about it at the time and I wish some of this solemnity and dignity would come back.

***Textus Receptus, full of similar errors, metastasized to find home in the King James version and practically every western Bible — invariably leading to a faulty understanding of the scripture, ****

I just checked my translations.
Wycliff
Geneva
KJV
DOUAI RHEIMS
NASV
RSV
All say “burned”

The Confraternity Verion says “boasting”.

Others on line can be found below, all say “burned”.

http://www.greeknewtestament.com/B46C013.htm

Also again, what of those burned by Nero?

All the bibles you list are western bible which came either from Vulgate or Textus Receptus. The former is a 5th century Latin version made by Jerome, but the oldest copy of that bible is an 8th century copy.

The Vulgate replaced the Old Latin Bible and was expressly used only in the western Church.

The rest of the Bibles you quote are essentially based on Textus Receptus or TR, a 16th century collection of 12th century Greek texta and Staphanes' French Greek sources (all of which are latter-day copies).

This was done because no one but Wycliffe believed the Vulgate was a true translation of the Greek originals, so the English speaking community wanted an English-language translation based on Greek text. Trouble is, the quality of the Greek text was extremely poor, with plenty of copying errors, editions, deletions, and so on.

TR is an expressly unreliable source of Greek Text. Where needed verses were missing, they were supplemented by using Vulgate and retro-translating a Latin translation backwards into Greek again. Portions of the Revelation of John was done that way and other examples are plentiful.

Thus in Acts 9:6 the section reading "And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me do..." is not found in any Greek manuscripts but was added to TR from Vulgate.

There are also known forgeries such as (in)the famous Pericope Adulterae and Comma Johanenum that are incorporated into the TR, and from Tr ended up in just about any English bible afertwards.

Your own refreence lists Alexanbdrian text (4th century complete Greek bible) as having "boast" and so does latter-day Hort and Westcort, which are Alexandrian sources in English. The other two are TR versions.

Can you recommend an Orthodox bible in English?

Yes The Greek English Interlinear New Testament, Robert K. Brown, Phillip W. Comfort, Tyndale House Publishers, 1990. Or The Greek New Testament by United Bible Societies, 1993.

They represent the oldest available full biblical texts (4th century). The Greek Orthodox Church unfortunately suggests KJV, a very bad choice.

The GOC also uses a 5th century NT which is a heavily redacted and doctored source which makes it highly unreliable. It also mixed the the Byzantine and Alexandrian text-types (the Gospels and the Epistles of Paul being in different text-types).

The GOC's OT is likewise heavily influenced by the Hebrew rather than Septuagint OT. The Apostles almost exclusively used the Septuagint as OT reference.

For OT, I recommend C. L. Benton's Septuagint Old Testament.

It is actually available online in both Greek and English versions.

****The rest of the Bibles you quote are essentially based on Textus Receptus or TR, a 16th century collection of 12th century Greek texta and Staphanes’ French Greek sources (all of which are latter-day copies).****

Not quite. Those from the Revised Version onward use the Alexandrian, Vatacanus and Sinaiaticus texts of the 4th century and say “burnt” except for the Confraternity text.

Again, what of those burnt by Nero and those eaten by lions in the Arena.

Not quite. Those from the Revised Version onward use the Alexandrian, Vatacanus and Sinaiaticus texts of the 4th century and say "burnt" except for the Confraternity tex

The (4th c) Aexandrian text-type (Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus, etc. as well as latter-day Nestle-Aland) in your own link shows the word kauchesomai (boast); the 5th cnetury Byzantine and the 16th century TR versions show kauthesomai (burned).

Subtle. Someone mistook a chi (χ) for a theta (θ)

The oldest Latin Vulgate is an 8th century copy, so we don't know if this, originally early 5th century, Latin Bible contained the word "burned" or "boast" but there is every reason to assume that +Jerome wanted to use the same Bible used by the Greek Church (since the Church was still united), which would be the 5th century Codex Alexandrinus.

Trouble is C. Alexandrinus is mix of Alexnadrian (older) and Byzantine text-types, it is highly redacted and made "smoother" than the complete (Alexandrian-type) bibles from the century prior.

Thus, +Jerome would have been using a more redacted source which contained errors of copying, additions and deletions (such as in 1 Cor 13:3 the first words kan in the 4th c. version and kai ean in the 5th c. copy). But +Jerome also ad-libed a bit too (i.e. Act 9:6), so the 5th century Vulgate is useless as comparative text. Besides, it's a translation.

And, we all know that we can't use translations, Latin or English, as evidence of what the original says. Yet, the fact is, Textus Receptus relied heavily on Vulgate for missing sections, and even on Tyndale's personal retro-translations from Latin into Greek and passing TR as a "genuine" Greek text source.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.