The on-going question of cremation versus burial:

Here js a brief article that, IMHO, ought to be read by all pastors, and any others who help folks make decisions surrounding the death of a loved one. That includes virtually all of us, sooner or later, so this is a matter that ought to be dealt with as part of a church's teaching. This article touches on a number of points that ought to be further explored and discussed. 

https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/cremation-burial-choice/

I encourage you to read the article rather than merely my thoughts about it, but to encourage a conversation, I offer the following:

• Justin Dillehay, a Baptist pastor from Tennessee, does a pretty good job of staying in the road on this tough issue. He avoids the extreme of saying what we do with our dead doesn't matter (for the record, I agree with him. I think it does matter). He maintains that for a long time, standard Western burial practice was referred to as "Christian burial," and that this means something.
  He also refrains from adopting a legalistic tone.  "[I]t’s not that cremation is a violation of a direct biblical command." "[T]here’s no moral prohibition on cremation in the Bible."
• There is no doubt that Dillahay, comes down on the side of maintaining "Christian burial" as the norm for God's people. In doing so, he in no way--that I could see anyhow--drifts into the clearly heretical notion that what we do with the departed loved one's body has any impact on that loved one's eternal state. Though he does make the case for burial, he refrains from saying that cremation is devoid of at least reasonable justification.
• One reasonable justification is cost. At least twice in the article, Dillehay mentions this. He even implies, if not flat-out says, that churches ought to be of some help in this regard.
• While Dillehay does not frame it in these words, his article brings out two important facts about sound Theology: 1) A sound Theology is integrated. Every point of Theology touches on every other point of Theology. Dillehay raises the question, without answering it, as to whether humans are ensouled bodies or embodied souls. I'm not sure those binary choices are adequate, but this is a short article.  That touches on the intermediate state of the dead and the nature of the resurrection and my second observation about the A sound Theology, 2) Sound Theology leads to right practice. One flows from the other.

(Concerning the intermediate state, I found this article that gives an introduction to three views, two of which are quite common. The article does not discuss a fourth view, "soul sleep.")

I'll make three comments that constitute some of my reactions to the article.

1. Dillehay rightly criticizes the "empty shell" descriptions that are often used to describe death, especially in explaining death to children. Yet, he also refers to scriptures that speak of the separation of body and soul. One has to dig deeper on this.
2. While Dillehay speaks of the reality of the financial difference between burial and cremation, he doesn't pursue it much. Actually, that might have strengthened his case. (See below) Given the popular impression that people have about the financial difference between cremation and burial, the financial considerations are huge, bigger than the article admits. (More below)
3. As Pastor Dillehay indicates this is a question that is worth pursuing. Four times in my career it loomed large for me.
   Funerals (and burials) are for the living. Dillehay is right. What we do with the body of a loved one (and what we request be done with our own remains) does say something.
   Fairly early in my pastoral career, a dear saint, someone I look forward to seeing in heaven, died. There were essentially no resources for a funeral, etc. The oldest son, in a very cavalier manner, declared that they would cremate the remains and go on with life. Probably stepping over a line--if not several--I declared that this son might do that to his father, but I wasn't going to allow that to happen to my friend. This man was a loved part of my church and someone who had lived in my home while he recovered from a serious health issue. Even though this was fifty years ago, when cremation was much less socially acceptable, my decision was not that cremation was absolutely wrong. Rather, it came from a conviction that what this son was saying about the worth of his father was definitely wrong. My church stepped up, and while I don't remember the details, my friend was properly honored and buried (not saying he couldn't have been properly honored had his body been cremated).
   Several years ago my wife and I served as missionaries on two different islands half a world away. What my wife would have done had I died "out there," or what I would have done had she died out there obviously remains an unknown. I told my wife, "If I die while we are out here, my recommendation is to have my body cremated. That way you carry my remains back home in a suitcase." Since then I've been told that is technically illegal, though it is often done. Transporting a body by air is quite expensive. 
   The other two experiences have to do with my Mother-in-law and my Mom. Both of these dear Christian ladies died as widows, away from the place where they and the rest of the family wanted them to be buried. Burial was the family consensus in both cases. I knew enough to know that the cost difference between cremation and burial consists not so much in the actual cost of the two procedures but in the cost of the "services" associated with "Christian burial." In both cases, family members transported the body from one state to another themselves. This was done legally and respectfully. Both were buried in inexpensive containers, the industry equivalent of a "plain pine casket." For each, a graveside service was conducted for only close friends and family, while a memorial service sans the body, and a time of visitation, was held at their respective churches. The casket was draped with a cloth out of respect not only for the deceased but for the mourners. At the visitation and memorial service, a picture was in place of the usual casket and body. All was handled with full respect. In fact, concerning one of these women who was known for her thrift in life, the fact that she was buried economically was an honor to her memory. The bottom line was there was little difference in the cost of the burial and what the cost of a cremation would have been.
   In other words, I would say that in addition to the Theological considerations, creative economic alternatives to typical funeral home procedures ought to be explored.

I think your thoughts in the comments could be useful to others who need to guide others through death-related decisions.

Some Thoughts on Death and Funerals

I started writing a comment on a friend's Facebook post. He had linked to the blogpost below. Thank you, Bart. I realized, after I started, that what I wanted to say was way longer than a comment ought to be, so I decided to write my thoughts, here.

I don't know Chad Bird (When I mention "Chad" below, please don't confuse Chad Bird with my son, Rev. Chad Merrell, whom some of you know). Chad seems like a good guy, thoughtful, smart and passionate. He and I share a view that much that is said at funerals shouldn't be said. I have thought for a long time, that pastors miss a great opportunity to minister when they, essentially, mail-in their funeral sermon (fill-in the name of the deceased). Chad posted about Things he doesn't want people to say at his funeral. I felt led to comment.

In a 42-year pastoral career--extended into the new gig I have as president of a small Christian College (I spoke at the funeral of a staff member, here)--I have done my share of funerals. Though, since the church I pastored had a young-ish congregation for most of my career and was smallish for all of it, I've not buried as many as some other lifers.

I recall a couple of funerals of folk over 100, and a few with coffins the size of a big shoebox. I refereed family fights. Once I got "fired" before I did a service, because of a comment about a cat that I made on the visitation night. I conducted a funeral for an old recluse who lived like a poorer version of Miss Haversham, and one old gent who outlived almost all family and friends. I helped the funeral home personnel and the one attendee who looked capable of lifting anything carry the coffin. One of the saddest was a service for a lady who had gotten lost in the system and spent almost all her life in a succession of state mental hospitals. There was probably nothing wrong with her. I attended many other funerals. As a musician, my wife ministered at many more.

Most pastors miss an excellent opportunity to minister at funerals. Solomon tells us of the opportunity in Ecc. 3 & 7. Second to Psalm 23, the list of couplets in Ecc. 3 is, in my experience, the most requested passage of scripture. Though most refer to the "Turn, turn, turn" song, rather than the Bible.

It is poor stewardship to waste the opportunity.

As to Chad's "Don'ts":

He and I have some disagreements Theologically, though I sense we have more in common than divides us.

Chad says: Don't say:

"He was a good man. Don’t turn my funeral into a celebration of my moral resumé. "

In the histories of OT Kings, many of the kings of Judah are listed as "good." One should not seek his own honor, but bestowing it on others, as Jesus did toward John the Baptist, or Paul did toward Timothy and Epaphroditus, or John did toward Demetrius is healthy and good. I don't see why just because someone is dead this should be different. There is a lesson to the living in the good example of the dead.

As always, the Lord should be elevated. Part of that praise is for what He did in the life the deceased. I don't think David was altogether wrong in his eulogy of Jonathan, though he had to be creative with Saul.

 "Chad...Chad...Chad. I don’t want to be the focus of my own funeral."

This prohibition is a continuation of the above. On a professional level, I disagree. While a funeral message is for the living, it ought to be, at least to some extent about the dead. Later on, Chad objects to those who forbid mourning. I agree. He objects to the belittling of the importance of the body. Again I agree, with some qualifications. Just who is it that we mourn? Just who is, or whose is, the body in the casket? I think there is something wrong with a funeral when someone can attend and needs to look at the worship folder in order to know just who is being remembered. Yes, absolutely point people to Christ, but that is not incompatible with holding up the person being remembered.

"God now has another angel." 

Dead people don't become angels. Absolutely right, but is a funeral the best place to teach anthropology and angelology? Like Chad, I hope that the person leading my funeral, or the people asked to speak at my funeral will not draw their Theology from "It's a Wonderful Life." I don't recall hearing the angel line from the pulpit, though I'm sure it happens. If there is an open-mic time, it is almost sure to come out. What do mourners mean by that statement? If we can bridge to an affirmation that this life that we now live is not the end, we do well.

"We are not here to mourn Chad’s death, but to celebrate his life."

Funerals represent a time of contrast. They aren't just one thing. We tend to not do nuance well. Yes, we mourn, but especially at the death of a saint can we not celebrate?. At the end of 1 Cor. 15, Paul looked death in the eye--if not spit in its eye--and, in essence, said, "Nah,nah, nah, nah, nah!" "We mourn not as others who have no hope." I find the last letter from Screwtape to Wormwood to be one of the most beautiful pieces about death ever written. It is a word of victory, worthy of celebration. I think David's eulogy for Saul and Jonathan had that nuance of praise and sadness. Indeed the mourning is accentuated by the good qualities David observed in the father and son warriors' lives. A life well-lived has a heavenly quality. Celebrating that is worthwhile. Can we stop the reactionary pendulum somewhere closer to the center?

"Chad would not want us to weep."

This is not a universal sentiment. A horrendous example of the opposite was Herod's instruction that a number of the notables of Judah be killed at his death so mourning would be assured. I was privileged to conduct the funeral of a church member I'll call "Mary." Over the years she gave me various pieces that she wanted shared at her funeral. Most of them were hilarious. Though I am careful about surrendering control of a funeral to the dead person, I thought Mary's wishes were appropriate--certainly in keeping with the life she had lived. Christ was honored in the service. There was more laughter than tears, though they were also present. We had recorded the service to accommodate family who couldn't attend. I think 20 or so dvds were requested. Chad is right. Mourning is appropriate. "Jesus wept." is not only the Bible's shortest verse, it is one of the most profound. Jesus wept not only for His friend--perhaps not even primarily for His friend--but for the Romans 8 condition of the world that his friend's death illuminated. Every time we attend a funeral it is a reminder that the last enemy, death--the enemy of the Lord of Life--has not yet been put down.

"What’s in that coffin is just the shell of Chad."

Most pastors that I know, know enough about their Theology to speak with a measure of accuracy within their Theological tradition. One shouldn't be surprised or upset if the person conducting a funeral speaks out of his/her own tradition. There are Theological differences concerning Anthropology. From the open-mic, again, anything goes. Again, I ask, though, is a funeral the best place to argue the fine points of Theology--human dualism-monism, transubstantiation, consubstantiation (which Chad brings up in his article), etc.? Whatever one regards as the proper designation of that body in the casket is, one thing is clear. It's dead. In spite of the best efforts of the embalmers, it is no longer fit for life. Yes, we should honor that body. Yes, even if it is burned to ashes, or rotted to dust, it will be raised. But, unless we are soul-sleepers, or advocates of immediate resurrection, we have to know that some aspect of the person that used to be intimately united with that body is no longer there.

Chad closes his article with this line. I repeat it here and add my Amen!

 Let them hear the good news, especially in the context of this sobering reminder of mortality, that neither death, nor life, nor anything else in all creation, can separate us from the love of God in Jesus Christ, our Lord, for He is the resurrection and the life.

Some thoughts from the House of Mourning:

This is one of those blog posts that has more to do with me wrestling something to the ground than anything else, but if it provokes profitable thought and/or comment from others, so much the better.  Solomon says that we are wise to visit the house of mourning (Ecclesiates 7)  I had to visit recently, and decided to stay for a bit, look around, and ponder.
From my last post here on the TVTMK blog as well as several articles at STTA, you may have gathered that my mom recently died.
My brother, sisters, and I knew mom's death was near.  In fact, we hoped it would come quickly.  Unlike when my father died unexpectedly, we had some time to plan.  Money was a factor.  We wanted to properly honor my mother, but we all think it foolish to be extravagant.  My immediate family lives in Virginia, Texas, and Indiana.  The next generation takes in another four states and a nation in Europe.  So, things are complicated.  Mom lived in Indiana with my sister. Her last real home was here in Virginia where my dad is buried.  Early on we decided that mom would be buried here.  Having any service in Indiana was unlikely, and in the end we didn't have any there.  One of the early points of discussion had to do with cremation.  Since mom would die in Indiana and be buried five-hundred miles away in Virginia, there were obvious logistical advantages.  I don't have any strong Theological/Biblical opposition to cremation.  I have read some of the attempts to prove from the Bible that it is wrong and haven't been convinced, but I was opposed to it.  Primarily I was opposed to cremating mom's body, because I know other people find cremation highly offensive.  I wanted to honor my mom.  That is hard to do that while thumbing one's nose at the sensibilities of others.  Especially since I am called to minister to those folk, I voted against that possibility.
We chose to have no viewing of mom's body.  I last saw her several months ago.  I hope I don't offend anyone by saying this, but generally when I go to a viewing (a wake as it is called in other places) I only look in the casket, because some people expect me to.  I don't need to see in order to know that the person is gone.  Perhaps others do. Mom's body was brought here to Virginia.  She was buried in a private graveside service.  Later that day we honored here in a Memorial service.

In a Theologically rich passage about death, the Apostle Paul speaks of the body as an "earthly tent," and says it will be "torn down." He says it will be replaced with a "dwelling from heaven."  After some further discussion, the Apostle, well versed in bodily suffering, pronounces his druthers--"to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord."  (2 Corinthians 5:1-8)
Yet in other places it is clear that the body is not merely a container of the person, but an integral part.  Jesus spoke of His friend Lazarus, as being sick, asleep, and dead.  In each case it was Lazarus that was in the condition Jesus described.  Jesus told His disciples, ". . . let us go to him."  (my emphasis) Jesus assured the grieving sister, Martha, "Your brother will rise again."  When Jesus called Lazarus from the grave He called him by name, "Lazarus, come forth."  (John 11)

Several months ago I visited my uncle's grave in Normandy, France.  Nearly ten, thousand servicemen are

buried there.  On a wall more than a thousand more names are inscribed.  These are the fallen whose bodies were not recovered.  If Sergeant  Hugh Allen Merrell is in the grave, where are those hundreds whose bodies were destroyed or lost in their battle against Nazi tyranny?

Obviously, there is a tension, here, and as with most theological tensions there is a tendency to gravitate toward one pole or the other, or, to change the metaphor, to swing the pendulum to one of the extremes.

I reacted against one extreme years ago when a close friend died.  His eldest son wanted to get rid of the body in as cheap a fashion as possible.  Immediate cremation, and unceremonious disposal was his plan.  My friend was loved, not only by me, but by many others, including his church.  I thought, and, more so, I felt that this proposal was wrong--even vulgar.  Not knowing where I would get the resources I said, "I don't want my friend to be remembered this way.  If need be, I will take care of the expenses."  (There was more involved, and as is often the case, the difference financially between cremation and burial was not as great as was originally thought.)  My friend was properly, but modestly honored.  Later when I watched this scene from West Wing, I was reminded of what I had done for my friend.  It was right.  The extreme that says the body is nothing is wrong.

Yet I hear others speak as if the body is everything.  Some of the more intellectual among them are fond of using the word gnostic*.  I think, in using the word they are railing against the extreme bifurcation of body and spirit that marked the Second Century cult, and is the excuse for the shabby treatment of the body that I and the fictional Toby objected to.  Yet in their objections, it seems that some go to far.  Look here for an extended--very extended--discussion.  They seem to make more of the body than it is, and pronounce absolutes were none exist.

I'm humbled by the realization that I don't all that I wish I did about death.  It is an enemy.  For those of us in Christ.  It is a defeated enemy.

*I find it interesting that in railing against gnosticism some folk embrace a characteristic of the cult.  The idea of, and dare I say "the pride in," possessing knowledge that others do not have.  Why else bandy about a code word that clearly separates the initiate from the ignorant masses.

Yesterday, after a long decline, my mother died.
Mom was the least healthy the four parents my wife and shared.  I can't remember a time when she wasn't sick, yet she outlasted the other three.  She spent more than a 1/4 of her life a widow.  Most of that time she was my nearest neighbor, living in an apartment my family was able to build for her.

September 30, about 12:30 PM Irene Merrell opened her eyes. She saw clearly for the first time in a number of years. Not only did she see, she also comprehended with brilliant clarity all that she saw, heard and felt. All at once the cruel hand of the dementia that had caused her world to grow ever smaller and dimmer—taking away her independence, then her recognition of others, command of words, even her self-awareness, and, finally the ability to do vital tasks like swallow a sip of water—released its grip on her in one liberating flash of deliverance. In an incalculably brief moment she became not only all that she had ever been, but more. Eighty-five years after her conception she became all she was meant to be. Irene was with us for eighty-four years
I think she first saw our Lord. She had been born into His family when she was still a child. Now she was born into His presence by angels sent to bring her home. I don’t know, but I’d like to think she saw Doc Merrell a moment later. He stands strong and erect. No Parkinson’s stoops his frame or brings tremors to the hand that reached out for hers. His playful grin shows the gap in his teeth. Her eyes have a sparkle that has for so long been missing.
Irene was known by many names in her life. Madge and Luke Hargrove called her Daughter.
Elene, Clara, Ray, Lena, Ruth and Jim called her Sister. There was no doubt she was Doc Merrell’s Sweetheart. Howard, Ted, Judy and Carol called her Mom. To Chad, Chris, Leslie, Audrey, Stacy, Joy, Jayne, Dawn and Mitzi she was Grandma, and to the next generation she became Gooma.
In eternity God’s people will serve Him, a task Irene was accustomed to. While yet a teenager she taught Sunday School, a ministry she continued off and on for more than half a century. She exercised the gift of hospitality and used her sharp mind to keep the books of one church. Her little crocheted angels are literally around the world. She died having no treasure here and much there.
Irene’s desire for her funeral arrangements can be summarized in four words, “What the children want.” In keeping with those wishes we will bury mom next to dad in a private graveside service and then honor her at a Memorial Service Thursday evening, at Covington Bible Church, 2140 S. Carpenter Drive, Covington VA 24426. The family will be at the church to receive friends at 6:30, the service will begin about 7:30. Mom desired, and we children concur, that in lieu of flowers donations be made to IU Goshen Home Health Care & Hospice, 200 High Park Ave, Goshen, IN 46526, or Covington Bible Church.