Prayers for the Dead
Prayers for the dead have no command, promise, example or form to be found in Sacred Scripture, so…how did it come about that the practice of praying for the dead arose in the Church? Martin Chemnitz explains it well in Examination of the Council of Trent.
After the time of the apostles, human affection for the dead began little by little to bring prayers and offerings for the dead into the church. For since among the heathen a great part of religion served prayers and offerings for the dead, and most Christians had been converted from paganism, and thought that the Christian religion ought not to make men more inhumane, they retained the custom of praying for the dead, as also many other customs, bent slightly, as seemed good to them, in the direction of Christian piety.
But since they lacked testimonies and examples of Scripture, certain
apocryphal writings were, as I have said, disseminated, in order that
this might not seem to be altogether out of harmony with Christian
piety. Thus when the heathen on set days, and particularly at
anniversaries, prayed for their dead, they also brought meals to the
sepulchers from which they thought a certain amount of comfort would
derive to the dead; this also crept into the church, as Augustine
complains, Letter No. 64. Elsewhere indeed this was reformed in such a
way that, in memory of the dead, friends brought food and other
donations for use by the poor and by the clergy, as one gathers from
Origen, Bk. 3 on Job; those who brought these things were called
sportulantes (basket carriers), Cyprian, Bk. 1, Epistle 9. Later such
basket collections began to be made when they celebrated the Eucharist,
and they were called offerings.
Memorials for the departed and prayers for the dead were at first made
privately, by friends, as according to Tertullian a husband prays for
his deceased wife. Later, according to Origen, Bk. 3 on Job, priests
began to be invited to them. According to Dionysius prayer for the dead
is made in church, but without celebration of the Eucharist. Finally,
as all prayers of the church were customarily recited during the action
of the mysteries of the Eucharist, so also the commemoration and
commendation of the departed was transferred into this action. Thus, as
happens in the case of human tradition and in a custom which is an
adiaphoron, there were varied and dissimilar observances.
From all these things it is plain and manifest that prayer for the dead
is not an apostolic teaching, or a divine command, or an article of
faith, or a necessary dogma, but a human tradition, introduced by free
and varied custom, and finally firmly established by superstitious
observance. Therefore no authority can be gained from there for the
purgatorial fire of the papalists without canonical Scripture; much
less can expiations, propitiations, and satisfactions for the sins of
the departed through the works of the living be established from there
against Scripture.
Source:
Martin Chemnitz and Fred Kramer, Examination of the Council of Trent, Translation of Examen Concilii Tridentini., electronic ed., 3:262 (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1999, c1971).
Remarkable, isn’t it, how Chemnitz in Examine is willing to distance himself somewhat from the Apology! Homer nods.
McCain: Or, and I know this is just a crazy idea, perhaps Blessed Martin Chemnitz, the student of Philip Melanchthon knew precisely what Philip meant when he wrote that little conciliatory aside that you seem so hung-up on and maybe, just maybe, Chemnitz may well know quite a bit more about the Apology and Melanchthon than you? Maybe? Just maybe? Hmmm?
Of course, it should be pointed out in fairness to Chemnitz that the Apology does not say that just prayers have a divine command, example or promise; merely that such prayers are neither useless nor prohibited in our churches. As demonstrated on the other post, our funeral service prays for the departed at least twice. I think what Chemnitz is mostly reacting to is the idea that our prayers alter the state of the departed; rather than asking for them to receive precisely what God has promised them: “His light and His peace.”
Pr. Weedon is quite correct, the Apology is against prayers asking God to change the status of a soul (either shortening the soul’s imaginary time in purgatory or moving the soul from Hell ot heaven). I fully agree that Chemnitz knows more about the apology than Weedon. But this post and the comments here seem to make it quite clear that while Weedon doesn’t know as much about Melancthon’s theology as Chemnitz, Weedon does know it better than McCain. Maybe, just maybe, Weedon has ministered to those who mourn and has long experience in pastoral ministry.
McCain: I know the 30 death/dying and funeral situations I’ve been privileged to be a part of can’t compare with Pastor Weedon’s experience ministering to those who mourn and to the dying. Nor to your’s! And I thank God for your faithful ministry. But, that’s not really the point of our conversation.
Perhaps a more careful reading of the comments here, and my responses, might prove helpful to you Pr. P. Our beloved Professor Marquart always had such a wonderful “take” on the issue, and from him I learned the pastoral way about this. “yes, of course, say a prayer or two, but then be done with it. The prayers are for the living, not for the dead anyway, in truth.”
Prayers for the dead have no foundation in Sacred Scripture and without foundation in the clear command, example and promise of Christ such prayers are not offered on the ground of faith. That is the extremely pastoral position of our Confessions, a position I would say we do very well to heed, and I do prefer Pastor Martin’s position over against Pastor William’s or Pastor Dave’s all three of whom are very fine pastors!
Rev. McCain, you suggest that “perhaps Blessed Martin Chemnitz, the student of Philip Melanchthon knew precisely what Philip meant when he wrote.” That is surely worth pondering. At the same time, though, I would throw into the conversation the telling fact that Chemnitz himself claimed that it is BML’s doctrinal and polemical writings, not his own, that ought to inform our interpretation of the CA & Ap. I don’t have a Luther quote at the ready; I’m just suggesting that Luther would be a healthy direction to explore in this discussion.
McCain: I actually spent some time yesterday poking around in Luther’s Works trying to find out what he had to say about prayers for the dead, and so far, I’m finding nothing but very negative remarks about the issue. I’m still looking.