DEAD
654
DEAD
thor expressly approves Judas's action in this particu-
lar case, and recommends in general terms the practice
of prayers for the dead. There is no contradiction
in the particular case between the conviction that a
sin had been committed, calling down the penalty of
death, and the hope that the sinners had nevertheless
died in godliness — an opportunity for penance had
intervened.
But even for those who deny the inspired authority of this book, unequivocal evidence is here furnished of the faith and practice of the Jewish Church in the second century b. c. — that is to say, of the orthodox Church, for the sect of the Sadducees denied the res- urrection (and, by implication at least, the general doctrine of immortality), and it would seem from the argument which the author introduces in his narrative that he had Sadducean adversaries in mind. The act of Judas and his men in praying for their deceased comrades is represented as if it were a matter of course ; nor is there anything to suggest that the procuring of sacrifices for the dead was a novel or exceptional thing; from which it is fair to conclude that the practice — both private and liturgical — goes back beyond the time of Judas, but how far we cannot say. It is reasonable also to assume, in the absence of positive proof to the contrarj', that this practice was maintained in later times, and that Christ and the Apostles were familiar with it ; and whatever other evidence is available from Talmudic and other sources strongly confirms this as- sumption, if it does not absolutely prove it as a fact (see, V. g., Luckock, "After Death", v, pp. 50 sq.). This is worth noting because it helps us to under- stand the true significance of Christ's silence on the subject — if it be held on the incomplete evidence of the Gospels that He was indeed altogether silent — and justifies us in regarding the Christian practice as an inheritance from orthodox Judaism.
We have said that there is no clear and explicit Scriptural text in favour of prayers for the dead, ex- cept the above text of II Machabees. Yet there are one or two saj-ings of Christ recorded by the Evangel- ists, which are most naturally interpreted as contain- ing an implicit reference to a purgatorial state after death ; and in St. Paul's Epistles a passage of similar import occurs, and one or two other passages that bear directly on the question of prayers for the dead. When Christ promises forgiveness for all sins that a man may commit except the sin against the Holy Ghost, which "shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in the world to come" (Matt., xii, 31- 32), is the concluding phrase nothing more than a periphrastic equivalent for "never"? Or, if Christ meant to emphasize the distinction of worlds, is " the world to come" to be understood, not of the life after death, but of the Messianic age on earth as imagined and expected by the Jews? Both interpretations have been proposed ; but the second is far-fetched and decidedly improbable (cf. Mark, iii, 29); while the first, though admissible, is less obvious and less natural than that which allows the implied question at least to remain: May sins be forgiven in the world to come? Christ's hearers believed in this possibility, and, had He Himself wished to deny it, He would hardly have used a form of expression which they would naturally take to be a tacit admission of their belief. Precisely the same argument applies to the words of Christ re- garding the debtor who is cast into prison, from which he shall not go out till he has paid the last farthing (Luke, xii, 59).
Passing over the well-known passage, I Cor., iii, 14 sq., on which an argument for purgatory may be based, attention may be called to another curious text in the same Epistle (xv, 29), where St. Paul argues thus in favour of the resurrection: "Otherwise what shall they do that are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not again at all? Why are they then baptized for them?" Even assuming that the practice here re-
ferred to was superstitious, and that St. Paul merely
uses it as the basis of an argumentum ad hominem, the
passage at least furnishes historical evidence of the
prevalence at the time of belief in the efficacy of
works for the dead ; and the Apostle's reserve in not
reprobating this particular practice is more readily
intelligible if we suppose him to have recognized the
truth of the principle of which it was merely an abuse.
But it is probable that the practice in question was
something in itself legitimate, and to which the Apostle
gives his tacit approbation. In his Second Epistle to
Timothy (i, 16-18; iv, 19) St. Paul speaks of Onesi-
phorus in a way that seems obviously to imply that
the latter was already dead: "The Lord give mercy
to the house of Onesiphorus" — as to a family in need
of consolation. Then, after mention of loyal services
rendered by him to the imprisoned Apostle at Rome,
comes the prayer for Onesiphorus himself, "The Lord
grant unto him to find mercy of the Lord in that day"
(the day of judgment) ; finally, in the salutation, "the
household of Onesiphorus" is mentioned once more,
without mention of the man himself. The question
is, what had become of him? Was he dead, as one
would naturally infer from what St. Paul writes? Or
had he for any other cause become separated perma-
nently from his family, so that prayer for them should
take account of present needs while prayers for him
looked forward to the day of judgment? Or could it
be that he was still at Rome when the Apostle wrote,
or gone elsewhere for a prolonged absence from home?
The first is by far the easiest and most natural hypoth-
esis ; and if it be admitted, we have here an instance
of prayer by the Apostle for the soul of a deceased
benefactor.
Arguments from Tradition. — The traditional evi- dence in favour of prayers for the dead, which has been preserved (a) in monumental inscriptions (es- pecially those of the catacombs), (b) in the ancient liturgies, and (c) in Christian literature generally, is so abundant that we cannot do more in this article than touch very briefly on a few of the more important testimonies.
(a) The inscriptions in the Roman Catacombs range in date from the first century (the earliest dated ia from A. D. 71) to the early part of the fifth; and though the majority are undated, archaeologists have been able to fix approximately the dates of a great many by comparison with those that are dated. The greater number of the several thousand extant belong to the ante-Nicene period — the first three centuries and the early part of the fourth. Christian sepulchral inscrip- tions from other parts of the Church are few in number compared with those in the catacombs, but the wit- ness of such as have come down to us agrees ■with that of the catacombs. Many inscriptions are exceedingly brief and simple (pax, in pace, etc.), and might be taken for statements rather than prayers, were it not that in other cases they are so frequently and so nat- urally amplified into prayers (pax tibi, etc.). There are prayers, called acclamalory, which are considered to be the most ancient, and in which there is the simple expression of a wish for some benefit to the deceased, without any formal address to God. The benefits most frequently prayed for are: peace, the good (i. e. eternal salvation), light, refreshment, life, eternal life, union with God, with Christ, and with the angels and saints — e. g. pax (tibi, vobis, spiritui tug, in .eter-
NUM, TIBI CUM ANGELIS, CUM SANCTIS) ; SPIRITUS TUU8 IN BONO (sit, VnVAT, QUIESCAT) ; STERNA LUX TIBI ; IN REFRIGERIO ESTO; SPIRITUM IN REFRIGERIUM SUSCIPUT DOMINUS; DEUS rv TIBI REFRIGERET; VIVAS, VIVA- TIS (in DEO, IN y^ IN SPIRITO S.4.NCTO, IN PACE, IN .ffiTERNO, INTER ^ SANOTOS.CUMMARTTRIBUS). — FoF
detailed references see Kirsch, "Die Acclamationen ", pp. 9-29; Cabrol and Leclercq, "Monumenta Litur- gica" (Paris, 1902), I, pp. ci-cvi, cxxxix, etc. . Again there are prayers of a formal character, in which but-
i
