Catholic Exchange

Be the Tree &#0151 The Body as Plant Food

If you have not decided how or where you want your remains to be disposed of, there is a company here in the Washington, D.C., area that has an eco-friendly proposal: The people at EcoEternity of Middleburg, Virginia, propose to make trees, not burial plots, "the final resting places for the ashes of the deceased."

For as little as $4,500, EcoEternity will place your ashes in a "bio-degradable urn" and bury them alongside a tree. As the urn decomposes, you "will become one" with your "personal" tree. Since up to 15 family members can be "become one" with a particular tree, the concept of a "family tree" will take on a whole new meaning.

Wanting to spend eternity as bark and other fibrous material is not a new idea: It is practiced in Europe, Canada, and "parts of Asia." Its appeal lies in the fact that cremation is "less noxious and resource-consuming" than traditional burial.

What's also true is that this idea could be possible only in a post-Christian culture.

Christianity has traditionally regarded cremation with — at best — some suspicion. One of the ways the early Church stood out from its pagan neighbors was the way that Christians treated their dead.

Pagans burned their dead. To early Christians, this was in keeping with the pagan denial of Christian beliefs about the afterlife, especially the belief in the resurrection of the dead.

In contrast, Christians buried their dead. Christian teaching about the Incarnation and the body as the temple of the Holy Spirit led them to treat the body with respect.

To this day, the Orthodox Church forbids cremation except when it cannot be avoided, like during epidemics or following natural disasters. While the Catholic Church permits it under more circumstances, it forbids cremation where the act "demonstrate[s] a denial of faith in the resurrection of the body." It also prohibits the scattering of ashes or keeping them in your living room next to a bowling trophy.

Given this history, it is not a surprise that cremation has become more popular as Christian ideas have become less influential. Nor should it come as a surprise that cremation is most popular in the part of the country where people are least likely to attend church or identify themselves as Christians.

The treatment of the body is not the only pagan element to this story: Trees, you see, occupied a central place in pagan mythology throughout Europe and the ancient Near East. Folklore is filled with references to sacred groves and trees.

These groves were the sites of sacrifices, both of animals and humans, and were said to be the places where the gods and spirits dwelt and communicated with their worshippers. Not surprisingly, trees play a central role in revivals of paganism today.

Now, I doubt that any of this occurred to the people at EcoEternity. That only goes to show how post-Christian societies can drift backwards toward paganism without even being aware of it.

The way that the West treated its dead was tied to what it believed about Christ. But absent those beliefs, it was inevitable that in death, as in life, people would find themselves as plant food or — dare I say — lost in the woods.

Comments

  1. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    I plan to be cremated.  I would never do this if it were against Church teaching, but, as the author points out, it is permitted as long as it's done with respect to the resurrection (i.e. the ashes are buried rather than scattered).  A body that's buried returns to dust eventually, after the decaying process, so I don't see the problem in cremating it when it will eventually decay anyway.  As far as EcoEternity, it's way too earthy-crunchy/touchy-feely for me, but I don't see how it violates Church teaching, either, since the ashes will be buried all in one place rather than scattered.

  2. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Claire,

    I don't think the EcoEternity solution necessarily violates Church teaching.  It all depends on the perspective and perception of those utilizing it.  If it is done because becoming one with the tree (read: nature) is the last effect one can have on this earth, then that person is wrong.  Because we believe in the resurrection of the body.

  3. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Maybe this is discussed elsewhere, but I haven't seen it.

    Many people come to funerals who have not seen the departed for many years and the chance to see the body at the viewing is the only opportunity for them to say goodbye to the earthly remains of a loved one.

    I think the day or two of viewing the body with a memorial, family Rosary and a vigil before the Mass of Christian Burial is a very moving and wonderful aspect which will be lost with cremation.

  4. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    I disagree with PTR, as well as with this whole concept. 

    First, to PTR, if the long-lost relatives really cared, they'd have been in contact before the death.  In the same way that I don't want flowers at my funeral (bring me flowers when I can enjoy them!), I don't want bogus "grief" at my passing.  If you care, tell me now when I can tell you how much I appreciate it.

    Secondly, while I appreciate the need to promote the idea of resurrection and ever-lasting life, how does "preserving" the body do that?  Are we suggesting that those who, for instance, died at sea and were "buried" in the water cannot be resurrected?  Come on! 

    I'm not proficient in science, but it's my understanding that we are made up of atoms that can be changed but not destroyed.  So what if I become part of a tree, or part of a fish who becomes part of a bigger fish who gets eaten by another human being?  God will "sort it all out" in His own good way, and in His own good time, and "put me back together again" (sorta like Humpty-Dumpty?) in eternity. 

    I'm not suggesting that the body isn't part of us.  Nor, do I think we belong in a land-fill or a garbage disposal.  But, I AM saying that our body is not ALL we are, and I think we do God, our culture, and ourselves a disservice by dressing it all up and painting it to look like we're still IN it, and allowing people who wouldn't give us the time-of-day in life to come and shed crocodile-tears over it.

  5. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    I suppose one could choose the tree that one wishes to nourish based on some non-flattering nicknames that one earned during a lifetime. Ash or birch comes to mind. You guys need a Christian reality check. Why do you suppose the pagans burned their trash and burned their deceased? On the other hand why do you suppose the Church said don't do that? One clue – it's got nothing to do with dust or atoms or where God can find you. It's got to do where the living can find you. A consecrated place where prayer, reflection and even celebration with flowers and pictures and such can take place to connect, to heal, to strengthen what is our faith, the Communion of Saints. Cremation is a cheap, non-dignified, pagan cop-out. Yes, God finds the aborted babies that have been consumed by flames. Imagine if they had markers, we could see, count and have prayerful vigils with candles and flowers. That's what I want around my gravesite. I deserve no less.

  6. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    I agree with Cooky. I certainly see the value in having a funeral or memorial services to pray for the dead and to say goodbyes, but the person is no longer in that body.  Whether the body is buried intact or cremated and buried, eventually it will return to dust.  I would much rather see people take the time for one another when they're still alive.  After I die, I would rather people remember the times they had with me, look through my scrapbooks, etc, rather than go visit my cold grave, where my soul does not reside anyway.

  7. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    A few thoughts …

    The alternative to cremation is embalming.  Embalming is (in my opinion) a grusome process whereby the dead body is preserved via many noxious chemicals being forced through the still veins of the deceased.  The dead are then "prettied up" with cosmetics and grooming so as to appear dewy and life-like for mourners at the funeral and so the body will not emit a stench.  For a steep price, this spectacle can be yours, so that you will appear beautiful in death as one fallen asleep.

    This is, again in my opinion, an outrageous assault against the dignity of the body AND a worldly prideful clinging to vanity even in death.  Many I know choose cremation as an expression of Franciscan poverty, and a cleansing of earthly attachments.  For those who balk at this, I recommend the customs of the Amish — where the deceased is buried in a hand-made rought hewn coffin within 24 hours, no embalming.  Those who are able to be there come, those who can't, can't, and pay their respects later.

    I'm all for showing proper respect to the dignity of the dead.  But consider a moment that most adults (and many children) spend their entire lives paying life insurance solely to throw some lavish prom-like social event upon death, that the average cost of a funeral is $50,000. 

    Let's not worry about what the pagans are doing and concentrate on state of our own hearts and souls.

  8. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    I think the whole point is where your heart and mind truly are.  The externals do not matter (as the Church permits both cremation and burial now).  What matters is the REASON or the INTENTION behind the choice. 

    Before, when the Church severely limited or banned cremation altogether, it was for teaching purposes – a response to when the faithful were confused and thought that the body no longer mattered. 

  9. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Cookie,

    I am sorry that I didn't express my point very well. I had not seen the specific aspect I mentioned in any previous discussion. I am of the mind of the Church in this.  I do not think cremation should be banned completely. But having no body to see after death could lead to some people to errors in their beliefs.

    Human persons are not angelic spirits "renting" a piece of meat to walk around in for however many years the Lord grants us. We do profess our belief in the resurrection of the body every Sunday at Mass.  And our bodies are temples of the Holy Spirit.  

    My wife and nine children and I live about 2,000 miles from most of our aunts, uncles, and cousins. But we still care about them.  We still love them (give them the time of day and so forth).  But it is a good thing when grieving to be able to kneel beside the body and pray when we travel back for the memorial and funeral Mass of a relative.

    The example that brought this to mind was when two of our dear nieces were killed in a freak tornado in College Park Maryland several years ago.

  10. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    The Church allows cremation just as Moses allowed divorce. It just depends on the Archdiocese. No bishop is going to fight you if you want to go up in flames. Except for a couple of postings about an Amish funeral and PTR’s posting, the rest are just feelings and opinions. They have little to do with the orthodoxy of the Faith. If you want to do a Frank Sinatra funeral – I did it my way, or a PPA funeral of – It’s my body and my choice, then no one can stop you. To suggest that embalming is an assault on the dignity of the body is tantamount to saying that major surgery is an assault against the body. The embalming can be as elaborate as one chooses. The steep prices are the result of morticians’ hefty profits. No where is this more evident than in cremation which should cost all of a $100.00 based on a production line operation. This raises the issue of authenticity which is at best questionable. For the most part you’re getting no more individual ashes than you would get ashes of an individual log from your fireplace. As I said, if you want to go out the smoke stack to the four winds then it’s your choice. Don’t try to justify it within the teaching of the church. There is some substance to your arguments but about a gram more substance than the dust in the urn. 

  11. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Goral, I'm not so sure you can so easily state that the Church "allows" cremation "just as" Moses allowed divorce.  We are no longer in the times of the Old Testament.  We have a covenant relationship that is complete and all-powerful. 

    According to the Catechism (i.e…the teachings of the Church),

    2301 Autopsies can be morally permitted for legal inquests or scientific research. The free gift of organs after death is legitimate and can be meritorious.

    The Church permits cremation, provided that it does not demonstrate a denial of faith in the resurrection of the body.

     

    If you want to claim that the Church really recognizes cremation as WRONG (just as divorce always was), then you also have to claim that the Church recognizes autopsies to be WRONG as well. 

    Nothing I have said above (i.e…with regard to intention) has anything to do with feelings.  God judges the soul fully on the intentions that drive a person to act (or not to act). 

  12. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Goral, the FACT  that the body eventually returns to dust whether it is buried intact or cremated is not a feeling.  If the Church declared cremation illicit, I would never do it in a million years.  Moses allowed divorce because of the hardness of hearts.  I don't want to be cremated because my heart is hard.  And I am not trying to resist Church teaching because I want to be like Frank Sinatra and "do it my way".  For example, I would never deviate from the approved funeral format to have a eulogy about how great I am dominate the funeral. 

  13. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    I am in the process of getting more authorative information on this issue than I or anyone here can provide. I'm forming my stand on this based on the traditional Church teaching in this sensitive matter. Speaking of the OT Ipoch, cremation was not allowed and practicing Jews still don't do it. As the article says the Orthodox don't allow it either. The Roman Church tends to be on the cutting edge so to speak and then sometimes they have to pull back. It's my personal feeling that this is going in the wrong direction. Note the legalistic language: can be permitted, provided etc. We're not exactly in a comfort zone here. Let's see where it goes and I'll add whatever else I find out. I was somewhat surprised that I was the Lone Ranger in these comments in opposition. Back to the task of living.

  14. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Goral,

    I just don't see it my place to try to predict the mind of the Church.  If the Church permits something to the faithful, then I must recognize that others are fully within God's moral law if they chose to do something the Church permits.

    If, as Claire said earlier, the Church reverses this stance, we will be the first to accept it, embrace it, and follow it. 

    But to assert that people that don't follow a certain path, when multiple paths are available, are trying to "do it their own way", then you are off base.

    I can understand that historically the Church has opposed it because it was a pagan practice.  The opposition was to make clear the value of the body.  I think in the latter 20th century, the faithful were no longer confused by such errors.  Therefore the opposition was no longer needed.  In fact, the pendulum has swung too far, in my opinion, and the body is respected more than that soul. 

    So be it.

    I trust and follow what the Church says TODAY…not what it may say tomorrow. 

    And does this mean you will not allow an autopsy on you or anyone in your family?  Because it was stated as being "permitted" – in the same legal phrasing. 

  15. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Ipioch, we don't need to predict the mind of the Church, we just need to exercise common sense. Sometimes the Church takes a questionable stand under pressure or to emphasize something else. For example: The Tridintine Mass – not permitted, now permitted. I went along with the dictum but I knew that what once was Sacred cannot be taboo. So it is with cremation. There are forces that want this method promoted, some within the Church. Others outside the church who have economic interests in mind, yet others of questionable orthodoxy who routinely promote the secular agenda. I can not guess which way this will go either but there will for certain be more abuse of this method of reposing the remains. I've already heard of crematoria being cited for non-compliance in our state.

    There’s a difference in something being permitted and being promoted. Interring the body has been promoted since God buried Moses and before. I'm in the company of practicing Jews, Orthodox Christians, and the tradition of the Catholic Church. Those who espouse cremation are in the company of progressives, atheists and other non-faithful modernists. I don't pass judgment on them as lesser Catholics; I just think they're choosing bad company.

    My off base remarks use hyperbole to drive home a point; please don't take them entirely at face value.

    Autopsy is a separate issue; it's done to put someone’s mind at rest. It's really our discretion how a medical procedure is handled.

    Modern man knows less and is more confused about the dignity of the body than were our great-grandparents. More teaching is in order, not less.

  16. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    I have to protect my sources but I'm getting some info. that there may be pockets of promotion of cremation within the Church. Please say it ain't so but if it is then it's better that the facts come out now.

  17. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    I've got goral and Ipioch–as well as myself–all beat: my husband and I have agreed to donate our bodies to medical research.  The research facility will bury the remains when they are done with them.  With my and my husband's odd assortment of symptoms and disabilities, perhaps some Einstein can have a "lightbulb" moment from our remains.

    PTR, with all due respect to your personal losses, I disagree that "not having a body to see after death could lead some to errors in their beliefs".  The only ones who will doubt my beliefs in life-after-death are those who never knew me in life (I never leave any mind uneducated as to why I make the choices I do!  Wink 

    I've seen bodies at funerals and, frankly, I hate this custom.  Some are "prettier" in death than ever in life; some, unfortunately, look like Death had to chase them down and tackle them.  I prefer, like Claire, to remember those I loved as they were in life: real.  Ultimately, I agree with Sterling that our cultural death practices are no more than a bow to vanity and pride.

  18. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Goral, just to clarify:  my orthodoxy is not questionable, and I am not promoting cremation.  I have chosen it for myself first of all because it's more affordable, secondly because it takes up less space in the ground, and thirdly because it does not defy Church teaching, and I don't see the big deal between a body returning to ashes and dust sooner rather than later.  Cremation is not something that I have a burning desire for (pardon the pun), and it's not something I would lose sleep over if the Church developed a sanction against.

  19. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    "To suggest that embalming is an assault on the dignity of the body is tantamount to saying that major surgery is an assault against the body."

    Surgery is medicinal.  Autopsies can be necessary to medical science.  Donating organs is an act of charity.  Embalming is an uneccessary procedure to look pretty in death.  My conern is that in the same way that the Church permits cremation *so long as* this is not a rejection of the bodily resurrection, I worry that embalming is a denial of the reality of death. 

  20. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Embalming is not necessarily vanity; it prevents the rapid decomposition of the body. (Remember the concern when our Lord went out to raise Lazarus?) It is so funerals are dignified and don't stink like road kill. Even Jesus' body was annointed before they sealed Him in the tomb. And that's the job the women were coming to finish on Easter Sunday morning.

    In the Catechism, the Church teaches us that:

    "The bodies of the dead must be treated with respect and charity, in faith and hope of the Resurrection. The burial of the dead is a corporal work of mercy; it honors the children of God, who are temples of the Holy Spirit."

    and 

    "Autopsies can be morally permitted for legal inquests or scientific research. The free gift of organs after death is legitimate and can be meritorious."

    and

    "The Church permits cremation, provided that it does not demonstrate a denial of faith in the resurrection of the body."

    In Canon Law, the Church has it that:

    Can. 1176

    §1 Christ's faithful who have died are to be given a Church funeral according to the norms of law.

     

    §2 Church funerals are to be celebrated according to the norms of the liturgical books. In these funeral rites the Church prays for the spiritual support of the dead, it honors their bodies, and at the same time it brings to the living the comfort of hope. (emphasis added here by PTR)

     

    §3 The Church earnestly recommends that the pious custom of burial be retained; but it does not forbid cremation, unless this is chosen for reasons which are contrary to Christian teaching.

     

    So, Cookie, again I apologize for not communicating as well as I'd like.  I did not mean to say your cremation would lead people to think anything about you one way or the other — but that the wide-spread practice of cremation, having no body to view and bury after death, might lead some into confusion about what they believe and what we are all called to believe when it comes to the hope in our bodily resurrection. In this way, I hope you can see that it might confuse them.

    If I am not making myself clear, I'll just stop at this point.

  21. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Read you loud and clear PTR. Thanks for helping out with factual clarifications. I've done some reading of the blogs last night and found a preponderance of cremations among Protestants and non-believers. The Eastern Orthodox comments were reflecting mine, but we knew that. In the Catholic realm it seems to be in the minority but growing. As I look at the future with current info., mine may be the "Frank Sinatra" funeral (if I have something to say about it). I still hold tight to the traditional procedure until I see the staunch Catholic nations of the world start to go in the cremation direction. Also, let's see what the Church does not just says. By that I mean how funerals of the hierarchy will be handled. So to those who thought I was blowing smoke (pun is no worse than the others), thanks for bearing with me and giving me a reality check.

    As for the "greenies", how do oven temperatures high enough to incinerate flesh help the global warming situation? I'm expected to throw an incindiary (ugh) question like this out there.

  22. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    That's a good one, Goral (the global warming reference)!

  23. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Goral has raised an issue no one else has, and I think it's a good one.  I hope that some scientist knowledgable in the field might give us a "carbon footprint" of cremation v. burial.

    Ipioch, please don't apologize.  You write well, thoughtfully, and clearly, and I appreciate your additions to the various discussions.  To the old addage that "there are 2 sides to every discussion" should be added the qualifier, "there are always more than 2 sides….."

  24. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    I'm not a scientist, but I took math in school, and I understand the idea of scale.  The operation of an oven, even one hot enough to cremate human remains, even millions of them, is insignificant in the totality of the global climate. The entire mass of carbon in every human being is orders of magnitude less than the millions of tons of carbon released in a significant volcanic eruption, which is even much less impact of solar activity, cyclic weather patterns, and so forth.

    I'm not saying the practice of cremation wouldn't add anything and add it in the wrong direction, but that it is like lighting a candle in the middle of the current California wildfires. Hardly decisive.

  25. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    Thanks, PTR.  Good point.  (Math isn't my forte, either.)  And, I like your "take" on it.  I don't subscribe to the current Henny-Penny frenzy of Global Warming…..I was alive in 1973 or -4 when all the scientific pundits were predicting a new ice age in our lifetimes, and I was worrying about warm clothing for my little ones. 

Leave a Reply