Are We Burying the Gospel at the Grave?

‘Christian burial’ needs re-evaluation in light of the evangelistic task

What does the Church say about the Gospel through the way it buries the dead and ministers to the bereaved? Are its burial practices consistent with the messages of salvation by faith in Jesus Christ alone? Or do they imply a vague but convenient universalism, a universalism that avoids all painful confrontation between the Gospel and the world? Hard answers to these questions call for re-evaluation of the so-called Christian burial in the light of the evangelistic task.

Inherent in the evangelistic plea—“be ye reconciled to God”—is the recognition that all men are not yet reconciled. God gave his only Son so that all men could be saved, but not all have received that precious gift. There are those who are Christians. There are those who are not. And this distinction does not end automatically at the moment of death.

Yet much of our funeral practice takes no account of this. Often Christian burial is offered to all, whether or not they have openly professed faith in Christ; whether or not they have served him in the Church; and whether or not they have manifested the fruit of the Spirit.

In the day of death, the clergyman is often called in as chaplain of a “community religion” that has little in common with the austerities and boundless joys of the Christian faith.

The implication is that the Church makes no distinction between the overtly Christian soul and the non-Christian soul—after death. The world may easily conclude, therefore, that it doesn’t matter whether or not one lives as a Christian, since he will receive the benediction of God at the end anyway. Thus, in the world’s eyes the Gospel is reduced to a thing of little importance, and the word spoken at the burial is regarded as a human invention for cushioning the hard emotional impact of death. This practical universalism in burial practices continually suggests to the world that the Church does not mean what it says when it speaks of the necessity of decision, repentance, and faith in Jesus Christ.

Two objections are often raised when church leaders insist on making distinctions between people at the time of death and burial. The first objection is that the burial service is not actually for the dead but for the comfort of the living. In some churches this is simply untrue; and even in churches where it is true, the problem re-emerges at the point of finding valid words of comfort for the bereaved. The Episcopal Prayer Book, for instance, implies throughout that the deceased is a “faithful departed in Christ.” Although Episcopal clergymen do have the option of using other devotions for those not among the faithful, the majority use this burial order indiscriminately. In non-liturgical churches the manner of conducting the service is left entirely to the discretion of the ministers; perhaps many face the problem squarely.

Yet the question remains: What word of comfort can a minister who is true to the biblical Word honestly address to the mourners of a non-Christian? When the deceased has lived an openly Christian life, there is no end to the comforting assurances of God. But these assurances cannot honestly be given in the case of one outside Christ. The death may in fact be a stark tragedy. Is it true Christian concern for the living to shield them from the fact that a life lived outside Christ is not pleasing to God? Hope can be offered to the living on condition that they will put their own trust in Christ; but any hope for the living based on the assurance of the salvation of the non-Christian deceased is spurious, with no warrant in the Word of God.

We may be reluctant to pile sorrow upon sorrow, and reluctant we should be. Yet it is a betrayal of the living to cover over the fact that life without Christ is indeed tragic and that the certainty of death is a reminder of the need for eternal life in Christ. If the gospel doctrine of salvation is true, the kindest thing we can do for any man, including one who is bereaved, is to deal honestly with the facts that affect his eternal welfare.

The second and more serious objection is that the Church has no right to make judgments on the state of a man’s soul at the hour of his dying. That is true. We remember the dying thief who received gracious pardon in the closing hour of his life. Such is the grace of God that, even after a life of depravity, a man may enter the Kingdom through repentance and simple trust. Any person who has died may have turned to the Lord for salvation with his last breath, and the Church on earth would know nothing of it. The Church cannot say with certainty that any particular man is lost to God forever.

Yet neither can it say with certainty that one who has not openly confessed Christ before men and served him in his Church is “right with God.” The most favorable thing the Church can say is that it does not know whether this person was born again; his judgment is in the hands of God. Moreover, it is hypocritical and dangerous for the Church through its ministers to pretend that the life of one who lived outside Christ is cause for Christian praise and thanksgiving when death comes, whether or not he is saved through a last-minute act of faith.

Still, this is exactly the note that is often struck at burial services where Christian pastors officiate. Many times everyone present knows that the deceased did not profess Christian faith and had scarcely any relation to the Church. Nevertheless, he is eulogized as if he were a saint, and the ringing certainties of the Gospel are applied to him with the same confidence with which they would be applied to St. Peter himself.

To use the Episcopal Prayer Book as an example again: the soul of the departed is commended to Almighty God “in sure and certain hope of the Resurrection unto eternal life, through our Lord Jesus Christ.” These are fitting words for one who has lived unashamedly as a believer in our Lord. But they are peculiarly inappropriate for the myriad of those whose only overt connection with Christ and his Church is an unacknowledged childhood baptism and a year or two in Sunday school.

Surely, in the interest of evangelism, Christian burial practices ought to make some distinction between those who have lived lives of open confession of Jesus Christ and those who have not.

The distinction need not imply that the Church is making an infallible judgment on the eternal state of a man’s soul. But it does need to indicate that there are certain distinguishable marks of the Christian life for which the Church can give thanks to God in the presence of death, and that the lack of these marks makes the giving of thanks impossible. It is the Church in the person of its leaders that is asked to do the burying and speak the appropriate words. And the Church has the authority to apply its own standards, under the guidance of the Spirit, to any activity in which it participates. Whatever standards a particular church may use to designate a member “in good standing” can fairly be used in determining what attitude that church should take toward providing Christian burial when it is requested. Persons who are under discipline or who are outside the church’s fellowship should be treated accordingly.

Have something to add about this? See something we missed? Share your feedback here.