Monday, December 19, 2016

The Evil Of Cremation


 On August 15, 2016, the Vatican II sect's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (sic), issued a decree entitled,  Ad resurgendum cum Christo ("To Rise with Christ"). The decree, approved by arch-Modernist "Cardinal"Gerhard Muller, is a condemnation of certain "abuses" in the process of cremation. Cremation is the incineration of a human cadaver and the preservation of the ashes. There have been reports of people who have their ashes scattered at sea, preserved in jewelry, or made into a "memento." (All of which were duly noted in the Modernist Vatican's decree). According to the "Cremation Association of North America" (See CANA at cremationassociation.org), in the United States, approximately 15% of people who died in 1985 were cremated. In 2015, an astounding 44.42% of the deceased that year were cremated, with a projection that by the year 2025, just over 55% of people will be incinerated to ashes as opposed to being buried in the ground or a mausoleum.

 The True Church always considered cremation to be a great evil. It goes as far back as  1300 AD, when Pope Boniface VIII declared any Catholic who procures cremation for himself excommunicated. On December 15, 1886, His Holiness, Pope Leo XIII,  decreed that if someone has made a public request to be cremated and dies without retracting this sinful act, it is forbidden to give him an ecclesiastical funeral and burial. The 1917 Code of Canon Law made the teaching of the Church very clear. Canon 1203, section 1, states, "The bodies of the faithful must be buried and their cremation is wholly condemned. (reprobata)" Canon 1240, section 5 denies ecclesiastical burial (and as a consequence a Requiem Mass) to those who order their own cremation, even if the order wasn't carried out, unless such order was retracted prior to their death. What's wrong with cremation? Why did the Vatican II sect permit it? These questions will be answered in this post.

The True Teaching On Burial Of Human Bodies

There are several reasons why the Church requires burial:
  • Out of respect to the body as the temple of the Holy Ghost. It has a twofold significance in being buried; (a)  showing the cessation of temporal life on Earth and (b) the beginning of life beyond the grave. As stated by St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 15:36, "Thou fool! The seed you plant does not come to life unless it dies,"
  • Pope Boniface VIII condemned the horrible practice of ripping the flesh from the bones of the deceased (and cremation) as desecration of the body
  • The Church's condemnation does not mean cremation as such is prohibited by the natural law or Divine positive law, but She prohibits the practice as one propagated by the enemies of the Church as a means of gradually paving the way to materialism by "removing from the people's mind the thought of the dead and the hope of the resurrection of the body." (Instruction of the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office; June 19, 1926)
  • For serious reasons that affect the public welfare, the Church permits cremation (e.g., to prevent the spread of a deadly plague).
(The above was condensed from canonists Abbo and Hannon, The Sacred Canons, 1:470-471;496). 

Why Do People Choose Cremation Over Burial?
Popular reasons given are as follows:
  • Lower cost
  • Less space is wasted. 
  • The remains can be taken along by the family if they move away from the cemetery
  • Alleged psychological benefits in expressing the finality of death to the mourners, and that disposal is quick and clean unlike a slow and foul decomposition after death. 
The Real Impetus Behind Cremation: Enemies of Catholicism

The popular reasons enumerated above may be the rationale for certain people being cremated. However, they are  not viable at all for a Traditionalist. 

  • Response to the lower cost argument. Just because something is cheaper, doesn't make it moral. It's cheaper to have an abortion than to raise a child, but does less expense absolve from murder? Obviously not, and we should not desecrate a body for reasons of money either. Sin, of any kind, can not be excused because you want to save money.There are still cost effective means of burial for the indigent.
  • Response to the less wasted space argument. This is plain false. Over 1,000 people can be buried in just one acre of land. Bodies can also be layered in the same grave, and using multi-layered mausoleums prevent any so-called "wasted space." These are the same Neo-Malthusian  jokers who push for birth control due to alleged "overpopulation."
  • Response to the "take the remains along" argument.  If you can't visit the cemetery, it's better to pray for the soul of your deceased loved one knowing he is resting in peace, as opposed to having his desecrated remains with you. Do you really want what's best for the deceased, or what's best for you?
  • Response to the "psychological  benefits" argument. It is debated among psychologists as to whether cremation is better than burial for mourners. There are some who argue that seeing the body helps people accept the reality of death better--both the reality of the loved one who has departed, and the realization/acceptance of the mourner's own mortality. Also, what is therapeutic is not always moral. You might feel better taking revenge on an enemy, but this is not justification for the act.
The real reason cremation has been pushed since the French Revolution (and most especially since the late 19th century) can be summed up in one word: Freemasonry. A circular was put out by the Masons in the latter part of the 1800s stating thus:

"The Roman Church has issued a challenge by condemning cremation. The Freemasons should employ every means to spread the usage of cremation. The Church, by forbidding the burning of corpses seeks to maintain its rights over the living and the dead, over consciences and bodies, and seeks to conserve in the masses of the people the old beliefs, today dispelled by the light of science, extending even to the spiritual soul and the future life." 

The word cemetery comes from the Greek meaning dormitory. In the cemetery souls "rest," waiting in the afterlife as it were, until they are reunited to their bodies and awake to another life (think: resurrection). Cremation suppresses this symbolism and the truths they convey. The corpse is like the grain of wheat that gets buried, and seemingly dies, but sprouts up in new life. A burnt grain of wheat will never do that; a burnt body seems like death has the final say and is definitive.

The Vatican II Sect and Cremation

As noted in paragraph #1 of the Modernist Vatican's latest declaration on cremation, "With the Instruction Piam et Constantem of 5 July 1963, the then Holy Office established that 'all necessary measures must be taken to preserve the practice of reverently burying the faithful departed', adding however that cremation is not 'opposed per se to the Christian religion' and that no longer should the sacraments and funeral rites be denied to those who have asked that they be cremated, under the condition that this choice has not been made through 'a denial of Christian dogmas, the animosity of a secret society, or hatred of the Catholic religion and the Church.'  Later this change in ecclesiastical discipline was incorporated into the Code of Canon Law (1983) and the Code of Canons of Oriental Churches (1990)."

Indeed, it was one of Montini's ("Pope" "Blessed" Paul VI's) first acts to lift the absolute ban on cremation. Wotyla ("Pope" "Saint" John Paul II) enshrined this Masonic practice in his new 1983 Code of Canon Law. Canon 1176, section 3, states, " The Church earnestly recommends that the pious custom of burying the bodies of the deceased be observed; nevertheless, the Church does not prohibit cremation unless it was chosen for reasons contrary to Christian doctrine." (Emphasis mine). And we would know it was chosen for "reasons contrary to Christian doctrine"...how?? The floodgate is open wide. They did the dirty work of their infernal master.

 The results are now manifest. In 1963, cremation was virtually non-existent among Catholics. As of 1989 (the most recent statistics I could find) an amazing 26% of all cremations were performed on Vatican II sect members! That's more than one-in-four. I can only imagine what it must be for 2016. I had to shake my head in disbelief and hold back laughter when I read paragraph # 4 of "Cardinal" Muller's decree approved by Frankie:

 "In the absence of motives contrary to Christian doctrine, the Church, after the celebration of the funeral rite, accompanies the choice of cremation, providing the relevant liturgical and pastoral directives, and taking particular care to avoid every form of scandal or the appearance of religious indifferentism." (Emphasis mine).  "Avoid religious indifferentism"? You mean like John Paul the Great Apostate did at the Assisi abominations of 1986 and 2002 praying with all the false religions of the world? You mean like Ratzinger ("Pope" Benedict XVI) who gave "communion" to a known Protestant? You mean like Frankie, who tells us "There is no Catholic God"?  What a farce! 

Conclusion
 The Masonic chickens have come home to roost for Mr. Bergoglio and his worthless "Congregation to Destroy Whatever Remains of The Faith." They are attempting to appease some "conservative" members of the sect who are (rightly) scandalized by the number of cremations, and how the ashes are used. The naturalism of Masonry has been promoted and aided greatly in destroying belief in the resurrection and personal immortality after death. We are seeing the rise of materialism and atheism like never before, and cremation helps that process.

There is an undeniable link between symbolism and one's beliefs. Modernists and Masons understand this all too well. The Novus Bogus "mass" has destroyed all reverence for (what they still call) the Eucharist. Men dress like slobs, and women are dressed not just immodestly, but many times immorally. Anyone can hand out and touch the "consecrated" cracker. You take it from whomever wants to distribute it while standing up and putting it in your hand. The tabernacle is relegated to some hole in the wall, and no one genuflects. According to a study published in America magazine,  37% of Vatican II sect members don't believe in the Real Presence (which, ironically, they don't have anyway).  That's nearly one-in- four, a percentage unthinkable just 52 years ago. They are now believing according to the new rites.

Due to its symbolism, cremation carries with it a new way of thinking about life and death. Man is master of his destiny; an animal just like any other on this planet with no immortal soul or hope of an afterlife. The only goal after being reduced to ashes is to return to "Mother Earth" in anyway that person chooses. When people think this life is all there is and they are just animals, why does it come as a surprise when so many now act that way?






30 comments:

  1. Thank you and God bless you for this infomation, I'm spreading the word!!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Consider revising the "response to the lower cost". The analogy is a false comparison. Abortion (aka murder of a child) is against Divine Positive Law and even against natural law since parents have a natural instinct to care for, nurture and protect their offspring from harm. Cremation, even according to your own post, does not violate these so therefore is not immoral because God's law forbids it specifically but IS immoral because the CHURCH forbids it and, as God's official speaker or ambassador, holds the power of enforcing laws which God will also hold us accountable. The church says "if you do this you are excommunicated" which means you are outside of the church and as such are in sin. It is THIS action that you will go to hell for. You chose to disregard the authority of the church and the law they made, and since God has given them that authority and has stated that He would hold people accountable for those laws "whatsoever you bind on earth shall also be bound in heaven" you have therefore directly denied and ignored God's authority. The church could never give a dispensation for abortion. Period. It is inherently wrong and against natural law as well as divine. The church can, however, give a dispensation for cremation (such as during times of plague) or eating meat on Friday (Thanksgiving in America) or if it would drastically effect a person's health. I would like to share this article on FB but feel kind of hesitant with that comparison in there.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What you say is correct. However, the comparison is not a false analogy, because cremation is still wrong without a dispensation (e.g. Public health from a disease). To spilt hairs, only DIRECT abortion is always wrong. It is not wrong to have an indirect abortion using the principle of the double effect, e.g. If a woman has a cancerous uterus she may have it removed even when pregnant and as a result the child will die. The point I made is that what is wrong (whether by Divine law/ natural law or Ecclesiastical law) can't be justified on the basis that it is cost effective to do so.

      Your point is well taken, however, and I will revise by adding an example from Ecclesiastical precept.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
    2. All right I can see that. I wasn't really arguing your points or even really disagreed. I just found that particular example slightly distracting and a bit of a misdirect, speaking as one who has non-Catholic friends on FB. It was more hoping to stave off a discussion of "if the soul is gone what is the problem with disposing of the shell" things like that. Atheists and Agnostics aren't really going to get much out of this argument since they don't submit to the authority of God let alone His church and Protestants are protestant for a reason so, again same result. This specifically seems aimed at either Traditional Catholics who, somehow, don't know this or Novus Ordo who may have been told that it's okay. In any case it just seemed that the examples should reflect the central argument which is "Church Authority" rather than whether an act is inherently immoral. I was like "uh I want to share this but anyone who disagrees is only going to argue whether "cremation is similar, by nature, to direct abortion" and that's all they will wind up talking about which misses the actual point. The immoral act is the dismissing of the physical representation of Christ on earth, essentially throwing rocks at the Apostles saying "you can't tell me what to do". Thank you, for even taking a look at my response and even more for not dismissing it. It really is appreciated. :-)

      Delete
    3. Mirinda,
      Thank you for your comments. I publish (and take seriously) all comments from my readers. As long as the comment is respectful in tone and does not use vulgarity and/or blasphemy, it will be published and I will respond. There is merit in what you say, and I added a sentence to my post saying, "Sin, of any kind, can not be excused because you want to save money." So whether the prescription is of Divine positive law, or of Ecclesiastical origin, no one has the right to offend Almighty God simply to save money. Hopefully, this will end any comparison between direct abortion and cremation some may try to make.


      Thank you and God Bless!

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  3. Abortion isn't a sin, what are you talking about? I've performed numerous abortions on numerous Traditional Catholic women, some as late as 25 weeks and been told by my priest that it is OK. The priest is a noted member of NARAL and Catholics for Choice. And he is in the SSPX.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Will THE SSPX go as far as your sarcasm? God forbid! Anything can happen if they join the Vatican II sect.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  4. Replies
    1. A very Merry Christmas to you, your family and my "special family of readers" who read my blog each week! Know that I pray for your well being every night, and remember you every Sunday/Holy Day at the Most Holy Sacrifice of the Mass.

      God bless you all!

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  5. Dear Introibo, You have woken this sleeping dog up with a thump. As a boy, I was fully aware the cremation was forbidden to Catholics and why it was so. I only woke up to the novus ordo a few years ago, so when the "church" permitted cremation, I accepted the change in good faith. My grandfather was buried in a very old cemetery in the city, which is well kept and visited to this day. My father was buried in the same grave as he died more than 50 years after his father. We cremated my mother and put the ashes in that grave. I intended to be cremated and join the family in the communal grave. In this country many, if not most cemeteries are now derelict. I visited my grandmother's grave in a rural town years ago. The fences are gone; cattle graze there. It is simply a collection of broken and defaced tombstones in the veld. The family is spread around the world. Now obviously in my case there is no question of promoting masonry, or defying the Church. So, my question to you:

    "The Church's condemnation does not mean cremation as such is prohibited by the natural law or Divine positive law, but She prohibits the practice as one propagated by the enemies of the Church as a means of gradually paving the way to materialism by "removing from the people's mind the thought of the dead and the hope of the resurrection of the body." (Instruction of the Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office; June 19, 1926)

    1.Does this Instruction abrogate the rulings of Popes Boniface VIII, Leo XIII, c.1203,1 and c.1240,5?

    2. Does this mean that if I choose cremation for non-pernicious reasons, I can in fact be cremated lawfully?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dear Introibo, Please disregard my question. I misread the Instruction, (getting geriatric), which clearly still prohibits cremation. Now I know - burial for me. Thanks for clearing this up. God bless.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear Dr. Lamb,
      Always good to hear from you. There is no exception to the ban on cremation except for pestilence, and other serious reasons.

      You may want to consider a mausoleum. Christ was buried in a tomb that was basically the same. I don't know your financial status, but there are "pre-need accounts" to save up. These mausoleums are always well cared for, and perhaps you could be transported to an area in another country near a Traditionalist group that will frequent your resting place and pray for your soul often.

      It's not as cost prohibitive as it once was, and I pray God will keep you with us for many more years!

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  7. "Response to the less wasted space argument. This is plain false. Over 1,000 people can be buried in just one acre of land."

    Versus how many cremation urns? Urns are smaller than coffins. Even with generous spacing one can fit three to four urns in the same area for a coffin. So, no, it isn't "just plain false". It's a fact.

    https://www.southgate.ca/en/municipal-services/resources/Cemetery/Plot-Options.png

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon1:13
      It is false. "Bodies can also be layered in the same grave, and using multi-layered mausoleums prevent any so-called "wasted space." The idea that we have to use huge amounts of useful land for burial is wrong.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  8. You have forgotten that the Church has the power to bind and loose.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @anon3:47
      I have not so forgotten. I am a sedevacantist because there are things from which the Church CANNOT change, such as the fact salvation is not to be found in false sects as was taught by Vatican II.

      The dogma of the Indefectibility of the Church teaches She CANNOT give that which is false or evil. Yet, without good cause, the Vatican II sect has allowed cremation, which is evil. Further proof that the Vatican II sect is not the Catholic Church, and its "popes" were false popes.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  9. What are affordable ways for indigent to be buried?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @none
      There is what is called a "pre-need account" whereby someone can put aside a very small some of money ($100 per year) and after 40 years with interest, they can have a small decent burial when they die. Here in the United States, the indigent can also opt to be buried in "Potter's Field,"--land owned by the government.

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  10. I look forward to the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come (The Creed). Whoever freely chooses cremation does not appear to be a believer anyway and should not get a catholic funeral.

    You continue talking about "the Real Presence (which, ironically, they don't have anyway)."

    Arguing that this or that pope has lost his authority on account of heresy or apostasy is legitimate.

    But saying that the Church is empty (of a real priesthood and of the Holy Sacrament) is ecclesiavacantism: a grave error, which puts you on the same level as the schismatic Greeks.

    "And behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world." (Matthew 28:20)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. anon@10:08
      The Church is not empty of the priesthood or the Sacraments; the Vatican II sect is absent of these things. The Modernists who have taken hold of the once Catholic Churches, THEY have no priesthood.

      Traditionalist Catholics are the Remnant of the True Church and Christ is with us "even unto the consummation of the world."

      ---Introibo

      Delete
  11. What about if a person donates their body to science? The institutes that take these bodies, after their dissection, always cremate the bodies (typically in a mass cremation). Note that all medical schools use cadavers to teach many of the future surgeons the anatomy of the body and to look at what is healthy and what is not; after the semester the body is cremated. Is donating your body to science in this matter against Church teaching? If not, is cremation just an evil outcome that is tolerable from these secular institutions? I personally do not plan to donate my body, however I had several catholic family members who were in the medical field and did donate their bodies and thus have been cremated, but who also got catholic funeral Masses.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unknown,
      As there are exceptions to the general rule against cremation (i.e., prevent spread of disease), the need to have bodies to perpetuate medical science is a sufficiently grave reason to permit a Catholic to do so.

      God Bless,

      —-Introibo

      Delete
    2. Thanks for this article. You have no idea how many Catholics accept cremation now because the Church ok'd it. They don't even give it a thought on the Theology of the Body, why it was forbidden, etc. We receive all the Sacraments with our body. A soul cannot exist without a body, and a body can't exist without the soul -- unless an angel. We know the existence of dinosaurs because of their bones! Are we not worth more than the animals? Sadly, we have become a culture of cancellation and of disposable. State of Oregon legalized using body as compost! What next. When I explain how the cremation is carried out, many shake their heads in disbelief.

      Thank you for mentioning pre-planning. I work for the Archdiocese in the Midwest (not Chicago), and we provide pre-planning to our families. They have ground burial, lawn crypts and mausoleum (yes mausoleums are affordable now) options with payment plans up to SEVEN years with ZERO interest. Our families like it because it is budget friendly. Thank you for educating us with the history of cremation. The Church, US Bishops, and my Archbishop still prefer a full body present Mass. God bless you. Happy Advent Season!

      Delete