Catholic Baptism for the Dead ... per St. Paul

[brb3]

1 Cor. 15:29 Otherwise, what do people mean by being BAPTIZED for the dead ? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf ?

I read in a Catholic tract TOP TEN QUESTIONS CATHOLICS ARE ASKED, by Dave Armstrong], that baptized means ‘serving penance’ for the dead. Is this the Catholic understanding ----- that Paul is talking about praying for remission of sins of the dead ?

 

[Byzman]

1 Cor. 15:29 Otherwise, what do people mean by being BAPTIZED for the dead ? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf ?

I read in a Catholic tract TOP TEN QUESTIONS CATHOLICS ARE ASKED, by Dave Armstrong], that baptized means ‘serving penance’ for the dead. Is this the Catholic understanding ----- that Paul is talking about praying for remission of sins of the dead ?

Yes… this is what I believe this is what is going on here. But it was St. Francis de Sales who also said this too. Though I am not sure where I can direct you on this… I am sure someone else can though.

 

[TimothyH]

I read the same passage just this morning, containing the reference to being baptized on behalf of the dead.

**For God has put all things in subjection under his feet." But when it says, “All things are put in subjection under him,” it is plain that he is excepted who put all things under him. When all things are subjected to him, then the Son himself will also be subjected to him who put all things under him, that God may be everything to every one. 29 Otherwise, what do people mean by being baptized on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf? Why am I in peril every hour? I protest, brethren, by my pride in you which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die every day! What do I gain if, humanly speaking, I fought with beasts at Ephesus? If the dead are not raised, “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.” **(1 Corinthians 15:27-32)

Batism on behalf of the dead aside, I found the entire passage quite difficult. It seemed to me to be a series of unrelated statments or unrelated throughts. I couln’t piece it together.

It is not an earth shattering issue for my and my faith is not shaken. I read it a few times, tried to think it through and follow Paul’s line of reasoning, but could not. I just moved on and figured that I would find out some day, given a little bit more background on the context, if it is God’s will.

But I too would be interested to hear more.

-Tim-

 

[pablope]

1 Cor. 15:29 Otherwise, what do people mean by being BAPTIZED for the dead ? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf ?

I read in a Catholic tract TOP TEN QUESTIONS CATHOLICS ARE ASKED, by Dave Armstrong], that baptized means ‘serving penance’ for the dead. Is this the Catholic understanding ----- that Paul is talking about praying for remission of sins of the dead ?

This is the Mormon proof text for their baptism of the dead…which they did to (learning from mormon threads at the non-C section)…catholics (priest, nuns, popes), Jews, even victims of the holocust.

Anyway, I will borrow from our friends at CARM for an explanation of the practice…it was a pagan practice…carm.org/baptism-for-the-dead-in-1-corinthians-15-29

Verses 24 - 29 then mention Christ’s reign and the abolition of death. This is when this controversial verse occurs: “Otherwise, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them?”

Just north of Corinth was a city named Eleusis. This was the location of a pagan religion where baptism in the sea was practiced to guarantee a good afterlife. This religion was mentioned by Homer in Hymn to Demeter 478-79.1 The Corinthians were known to be heavily influenced by other customs. After all, they were in a large economic area where a great many different people frequented. It is probable that the Corinthians were being influenced by the religious practices found at Eleusis where baptism for the dead was practiced.

Paul used this example from the pagans in 1 Cor. 15:29, when he said, “…if the dead are not raised, then why are they baptized for the dead?” Paul did not say we.2

This is significant because the Christian church was not practicing baptism for the dead, but the pagans were.

Paul’s point was simple. The resurrection is a reality. It is going to happen when Jesus returns. Even the pagans believe in the resurrection, otherwise, why would they baptize for the dead?

 

[brb3]

This is the Mormon proof text for their baptism of the dead…which they did to (learning from mormon threads at the non-C section)…catholics (priest, nuns, popes), Jews, even victims of the holocust.

Anyway, I will borrow from our friends at CARM for an explanation of the practice…it was a pagan practice…carm.org/baptism-for-the-dead-in-1-corinthians-15-29

Verses 24 - 29 then mention Christ’s reign and the abolition of death. This is when this controversial verse occurs: “Otherwise, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them?”

Just north of Corinth was a city named Eleusis. This was the location of a pagan religion where baptism in the sea was practiced to guarantee a good afterlife. This religion was mentioned by Homer in Hymn to Demeter 478-79.1 The Corinthians were known to be heavily influenced by other customs. After all, they were in a large economic area where a great many different people frequented. It is probable that the Corinthians were being influenced by the religious practices found at Eleusis where baptism for the dead was practiced.

Paul used this example from the pagans in 1 Cor. 15:29, when he said, “…if the dead are not raised, then why are they baptized for the dead?” Paul did not say we.2

This is significant because the Christian church was not practicing baptism for the dead, but the pagans were.

Paul’s point was simple. The resurrection is a reality. It is going to happen when Jesus returns. Even the pagans believe in the resurrection, otherwise, why would they baptize for the dead?

OK … your explanation sounds logical, that Paul was not promoting it … but, using the pagan practice to only explain the pagan deep, inner desire to be cleansed of sin and see heaven.

So, then … how do we Catholics turn it around and say Paul wasn’t talking of Baptism at all, but of PRAYERS for the dead. And that this is GOOD AND HOLY for us. To pray for our dead, for those in Purgatory, and for those we are not sure about [believers or no ?].
And, if this is not at all what Paul meant for us to do … how does our Catholic Literature get away with promoting this idea, NAY – a TEACHING for us ?

this Catholic literature on this is being left in our Churches as official doctrine … see here
[www.osv.com/pamplets](www.osv.com/pamplets) [OurSundayVisitor] written by Dave Armstrong .. Inventory # P9. ///// Nihil Obstat: Rev. Michael Heintz, Censor Liborum ///// Imprimatur .. John M D'Arcy, Bishop of Fort Wayne-South Bend, Feb . 20 2008

 

[InspiritCarol]

OK … your explanation sounds logical, that Paul was not promoting it … but, using the pagan practice to only explain the pagan deep, inner desire to be cleansed of sin and see heaven.

So, then … how do we Catholics turn it around and say Paul wasn’t talking of Baptism at all, but of PRAYERS for the dead. And that this is GOOD AND HOLY for us. To pray for our dead, for those in Purgatory, and for those we are not sure about [believers or no ?].
And, if this is not at all what Paul meant for us to do … how does our Catholic Literature get away with promoting this idea, NAY – a TEACHING for us ?

this Catholic literature on this is being left in our Churches as official doctrine … see here

[www.osv.com/pamplets](www.osv.com/pamplets)   [OurSundayVisitor]  written by Dave Armstrong .. Inventory # P9.  /////  Nihil Obstat: Rev. Michael Heintz, Censor Liborum /////   Imprimatur .. John M D'Arcy, Bishop of Fort Wayne-South Bend, Feb . 20 2008

Your link - the url indicated doesn’t work.
The osv pamphlets are generally very helpful.
If you don’t feel called to pray for the dead, then don’t. I would pray for understanding regarding this, however. In addition to what the osv pamphlet has to say regarding prayers for the dead (2 Maccabes 12:40-45; 2 Timothy 1: 16-18), I would submit that when Jesus himself raises the little girl and Lazarus, he has discourse with the Father and thanks the Father in advance for fulfilling Jesus’ desire (I’m pulling form memory 'cause I’m in a hurry - sorry). Might that too be considered prayer for the dead?

Just sayin’

Anyway there are many threads on that subject wherein many weigh in on the subject.

Peace and Blessings.

Carol

 

[JonathonofOhio]

Paul calls baptism a burial, saying, “Therefore we are buried with Him by baptism into death.” (Romans 6:4). By this he declares the coming resurrection of our bodies. For the blotting out sins is a much greater thing than the raising up of a body. Christ declared this when he said, "It is easier to say, Your sins are forgiven, or to say, Take up your bed, and walk? (Matthew 9:5). To say ‘your sins are forgiven’ is the more difficult, but since they didn’t believe Him, he demonstrated how easy it was for the body to rise by saying, “Arise, take up your bed, and go to your house.”

Sin brought in death, and now that sin is dried up by Baptism, one should not, after being baptized, have doubt in the resurrection of the dead. For if you profess that your sins are forgiven, then it follows that you too profess the resurrection of the dead; for how could the harder part be granted by God and the easier part be denied?

This is what Paul is saying to the Corinthians. What shall they do if they are baptized for the dead? For if there is no resurrection, these words are but scenery. If there is no resurrection, how can we persuade them to believe things which we do not bestow? What will they do, having subscribed to the resurrection of dead bodies, and not receiving it? What need was there of this confession, if the fact did not follow? – were you baptized for the dead? The logical answer is no, you were baptized for the living!

Basically, he is addressing those that might preach baptism but deny the resurrection; showing that it just doesn’t make sense to believe in one and then not in the other, and that if you not believe in the resurrection of the dead, then baptism is nothing.

 

[brb3]

This is what Paul is saying to the Corinthians. What shall they do if they are baptized for the dead? For if there is no resurrection, these words are but scenery. If there is no resurrection, how can we persuade them to believe things which we do not bestow? What will they do, having subscribed to the resurrection of dead bodies, and not receiving it? What need was there of this confession, if the fact did not follow? – were you baptized for the dead? The logical answer is no, you were baptized for the living!

Basically, he is addressing those that might preach baptism but deny the resurrection; showing that it just doesn’t make sense to believe in one and then not in the other, and that if you not believe in the resurrection of the dead, then baptism is nothing.

Yes … but, it clearly appears Paul is referring to an active event occurring within the Corinthian Church. Perhaps these Greek Christians had a pagan or Jewish Pharisetical tradition of baptizing the dead … which they continued doing for their dead parents, etc.
And, perhaps the Jews of Sadducean backgrounds were telling them it was worthless.

And, I don’t see Paul condemning it/them. He is using the fact … to support his argument on the validity of the Resurrection.

 

[JonathonofOhio]

Yes … but, it clearly appears Paul is referring to an active event occurring within the Corinthian Church. Perhaps these Greek Christians had a pagan or Jewish Pharisetical tradition of baptizing the dead … which they continued doing for their dead parents, etc.
And, perhaps the Jews of Sadducean backgrounds were telling them it was worthless.

And, I don’t see Paul condemning it/them. He is using the fact … to support his argument on the validity of the Resurrection.

It is known that the pagans did baptize…so did the Jews at that time, which is why the apostles refer to ‘being Baptized in Jesus’ name’. But I don’t see any strong evidence that Paul is referring to that here, and he certainly would not need pagan baptism or Jewish baptism to support his argument.

“Otherwise, what will those do who are baptized for the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why then are they baptized for them?” (verse 29) is the verse in question here-- and when looked at by itself out of context it sure looks like he’s talking about Christians baptizing the dead, or perhaps referring to Jewish baptism or even pagan baptism…but let’s see if that makes sense…

Verse 1-11: He reminds them what they were taught.
Verse 12: He states the problem (they doubt the resurrection).
From that point on he proposes logical arguments, some in the form of rhetorical questions, such as verse 29. These questions are meant to get them thinking in order for them to see the fail in logic; in order for them to see the trap they have fallen into-- in being baptized but then not believing in the resurrection. That if they don’t believe then their belief is in vain.

It makes no sense to me that Paul would suddenly mention a Pagan ritual that has nothing to do with Christian Baptism, and use it to support Christian Baptism and the belief in the resurrection. I too used to think that Paul was referring to a pagan practice, or perhaps some Christian belief, or more likely the Jewish baptism, because that was what I was led to believe by others. It seemed confusing to me until I studied this more in detail…if he does allude to anything here, I would think it be more likely the Jewish practice of baptism, but I just don’t think he actually is. Perhaps his question is phrased to remind them of the difference in what he was teaching them from that of what the Jews taught (specifically the Sadducee’s), but all I see here is a rhetorical question designed to invoke the person to think about what they have come to believe and the obvious fail in logic.

See newadvent.org/fathers/220140.htm
Homilies on First Corinthians (by John Chrysostom) (347-407 AD)

 

[fred_conty]

There was the incident in Jesus’ ministry where he commented to a man who wanted to follow him but first had to bury his father. Then Jesus said, “let the dead bury the dead.” The commentary in the Jerusalem bible mentioned that he was referring to those who were dead inside of themselves by following a pegan religion. The man was more or less told not to go to a pegan funeral for his father which was wrong to do when he had been given the light of Jesus.

From this it might be said that baptism of the dead may refer to the dead soul inside of the person and baptism brings this dead soul(person) back to life.

Just a thought.

 

[Byzman]

2 Maccabees 12:42-44

Turning to supplication, they prayed that the sinful deed might be fully blotted out. The noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves free from sin, for they had seen with their own eyes what had happened because of the sin of those who had fallen. He then took up a collection among all his soldiers, amounting to two thousand silver drachmas, which he sent to Jerusalem to provide for an expiatory sacrifice. In doing this he acted in a very excellent and noble way, inasmuch as he had the resurrection in mind; **for if he were not expecting the fallen to rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead. **

Notice these last words here in bold…how similar to St. Paul’s words…if there is no resurrection of the dead…why baptize for the dead? In other words St. Paul is saying it is pointless to baptize, or what I take as offering their sufferings(praying), on behalf of the dead, if they themselves do not believe in the resurrection of the dead.

This was the opinion of St. Robert Bellarmine and St. Francis de Sales.

 

[JonathonofOhio]

2 Maccabees 12:42-44

Notice these last words here in bold…how similar to St. Paul’s words…if there is no resurrection of the dead…why baptize for the dead? In other words St. Paul is saying it is pointless to baptize, or what I take as offering their sufferings(praying), on behalf of the dead, if they themselves do not believe in the resurrection of the dead.

This was the opinion of St. Robert Bellarmine and St. Francis de Sales.

I had thought this at one time too, but I see no interpretation among the Church Father’s (yet) to support this interpretation.

“Baptize” always seems to refer to directly to baptism (the Sacrament), and never to just “praying for someone” (that I have seen). I’d like to hear more supporting arguments from anyone reading this that support the interpretation that Paul is simply referring to praying for the dead. I just don’t see that this proposed interpretation of 1 Corr 15 holds water for me at this point in time.

 

[Byzman]

I had thought this at one time too, but I see no interpretation among the Church Father’s (yet) to support this interpretation.

“Baptize” always seems to refer to directly to baptism (the Sacrament), and never to just “praying for someone” (that I have seen). I’d like to hear more supporting arguments from anyone reading this that support the interpretation that Paul is simply referring to praying for the dead.

Though you are right that when Scripture speaks of Baptism it usually refers to the Sacrament. But it is also acknowledged that in Scripture baptism does indeed refer to sufferings.

Jesus said to them, “You do not know what you are asking. Can you drink the cup that I drink or be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?” They said to him, “We can.” Jesus said to them, “The cup that I drink, you will drink, and with the baptism with which I am baptized, you will be baptized.

New American Bible. 2011 (Revised Edition) (Mk 10:38–39). Washington, DC: The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops

Jesus says we must all take up our cross and follow him…we all know that this refers to going through our many trials in His name. Jesus wants us to share in this with Him!

Even in the NAB commentary it states for this passage here:

Can you drink the cup … I am baptized?: the metaphor of drinking the cup is used in the Old Testament to refer to acceptance of the destiny assigned by God; see note on Psalm 11:6. In Jesus’ case, this involves divine judgment on sin that Jesus the innocent one is to expiate on behalf of the guilty (Mk 14:24; Is 53:5). His baptism is to be his crucifixion and death for the salvation of the human race; cf. Lk 12:50. The request of James and John for a share in the glory (Mk 10:35–37) must of necessity involve a share in Jesus’ sufferings, the endurance of tribulation and suffering for the gospel (Mk 10:39). The authority of assigning places of honor in the kingdom is reserved to God (Mk 10:40).

New American Bible. 2011 (Revised Edition). Washington, DC: The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

It is precisely this reason why I believe St. Paul is speaking about our suffrages on behalf of the dead. St. Paul is big on suffering for the sake of the Church.

 

[JonathonofOhio]

Though you are right that when Scripture speaks of Baptism it usually refers to the Sacrament. But it is also acknowledged that in Scripture baptism does indeed refer to sufferings.

Jesus says we must all take up our cross and follow him…we all know that this refers to going through our many trials in His name. Jesus wants us to share in this with Him!

Even in the NAB commentary it states for this passage here:

It is precisely this reason why I believe St. Paul is speaking about our suffrages on behalf of the dead. St. Paul is big on suffering for the sake of the Church.

Ah, interesting points

You should read John Chrysostom’s homily on this though:
See newadvent.org/fathers/220140.htm
Homilies on First Corinthians (by John Chrysostom) (347-407 AD)

I’m still going to meditate on this further, but at this point in time I’m not sure if I could subscribe to your interpretation fully since Paul seems to be referring to the sacrament of Baptism. I say this because he is talking about Christ’s resurrection. It isn’t quite making sense to me why he would suddenly throw in suffrage for the dead when he is talking about Christ’s resurrection, and their faith, which they professed at Baptism. I would very much like to see more New Testament support for prayers for the dead (not that I need that to prove it; history proves it), but I don’t think this is a very strong case for it.

Paul calls baptism a burial, saying, “Therefore we are buried with Him by baptism into death.” in Romans 6:4, and throughout Roman’s 6 he uses the same language when talking about the Sacrament of Baptism.

Keep in mind that the blotting out sins is a much greater thing than the raising up of a body. Christ declared this when he said, "It is easier to say, Your sins are forgiven, or to say, Take up your bed, and walk? (Matthew 9:5). To say ‘your sins are forgiven’ is the more difficult, but since they didn’t believe Him, he demonstrated how easy it was for the body to rise by saying, “Arise, take up your bed, and go to your house.”.

It seems more likely that Paul is asking a rhetorical question of sorts. In other words: What are you going to do since you were baptized for the dead (not into life-- see Romans 6)? If you believe there is no resurrection, then why are you baptized for the dead (what’s the point)? To me that is what he is saying, and this is in harmony with Romans 6 and, well, everything else in the gospels.

“But he said to another: Follow me. And he said: Lord, suffer me first to go, and to bury my father. And Jesus said to him: Let the dead bury their dead: but go thou, and preach the kingdom of God.” Luke 9:59-60

Paul’s reasoning in 1 Corr 15 follows this teaching: those who do not believe in the resurrection are spiritually dead, and, therefore, they were baptized for the dead, not into life.

Furthermore, if we do not interpret verse 29 in that manner, then what do we make of Paul’s command “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we shall die.”? It seems to me (at this point) more likely that Paul is simply being rhetorical rather than referring to the prayers for the dead.

I realize Challoner, in his commentary, states exactly what you are saying, but he puts it forth as a suggested interpretation, not as an infallible one.

 

[garyo49]

Ah, interesting points

You should read John Chrysostom’s homily on this though:
See newadvent.org/fathers/220140.htm
Homilies on First Corinthians (by John Chrysostom) (347-407 AD)

I’m still going to meditate on this further, but at this point in time I’m not sure if I could subscribe to your interpretation fully since Paul seems to be referring to the sacrament of Baptism. I say this because he is talking about Christ’s resurrection. It isn’t quite making sense to me why he would suddenly throw in suffrage for the dead when he is talking about Christ’s resurrection, and their faith, which they professed at Baptism. I would very much like to see more New Testament support for prayers for the dead (not that I need that to prove it; history proves it), but I don’t think this is a very strong case for it.

Paul calls baptism a burial, saying, “Therefore we are buried with Him by baptism into death.” in Romans 6:4, and throughout Roman’s 6 he uses the same language when talking about the Sacrament of Baptism.

Keep in mind that the blotting out sins is a much greater thing than the raising up of a body. Christ declared this when he said, "It is easier to say, Your sins are forgiven, or to say, Take up your bed, and walk? (Matthew 9:5). To say ‘your sins are forgiven’ is the more difficult, but since they didn’t believe Him, he demonstrated how easy it was for the body to rise by saying, “Arise, take up your bed, and go to your house.”.

It seems more likely that Paul is asking a rhetorical question of sorts. In other words: What are you going to do since you were baptized for the dead (not into life-- see Romans 6)? If you believe there is no resurrection, then why are you baptized for the dead (what’s the point)? To me that is what he is saying, and this is in harmony with Romans 6 and, well, everything else in the gospels.

“But he said to another: Follow me. And he said: Lord, suffer me first to go, and to bury my father. And Jesus said to him: Let the dead bury their dead: but go thou, and preach the kingdom of God.” Luke 9:59-60

Paul’s reasoning in 1 Corr 15 follows this teaching: those who do not believe in the resurrection are spiritually dead, and, therefore, they were baptized for the dead, not into life.

Furthermore, if we do not interpret verse 29 in that manner, then what do we make of Paul’s command “Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we shall die.”? It seems to me (at this point) more likely that Paul is simply being rhetorical rather than referring to the prayers for the dead.

I realize Challoner, in his commentary, states exactly what you are saying, but he puts it forth as a suggested interpretation, not as an infallible one.

I think you have nailed it. Paul was asking a rhetorical question. I read a lot on this at one time, though it’s been a while. It seems like most of what I read said that Paul was talking about a heretical group that was baptising for the dead and he was using this to make a point.

Mormons use this single verse in the Bible to support their baptism for the dead practice. Paul is talking about Jesus resurection and resurection in general. The chapter is about 58 verses and it seems unlikely that he would switch to talking about a new practice in one verse and then suddenly switch back. I don’t want to seem too critical but mormons are very good at cherry-picking single verses (always out of context) out of the Bible and at the same time say that the Bible can’t be trusted to be translated correctly.

 

[ChrisCath]

[BIBLEDRB]1 Corinthians 15:29-31[/BIBLEDRB]

1. Several late interpreters understand a metaphorical baptism, and that to be baptized for the dead, is to undertake self-denials, mortifications, and works of penance, in hopes of a happy resurrection; and this exposition agrees with what follows, of being exposed to dangers every hour, of dying daily, etc. But this explanation is not so much as mentioned in any of the ancient interpreters.
2. Some think that St. Paul tells the Corinthians that they ought not to question the resurrection of the dead (for they had a custom among them, if any one died without baptism, to baptize another that was living for him; and this they did, fancying that such a baptism would be profitable to the dead person, in order to have a happy resurrection). Tertullian mentions this custom in one or two places, and also St. Chrysostom on this place.
3. St. Chrysostom and the Greek interpreters, who generally follow him, expound these words, who are baptized for the dead, as if it were the same as to say, who receive baptism with hopes that they themselves, and all the dead, will rise again; and therefore make a profession, when they are baptized, that they believe the resurrection.

Exerpted from: Haydock Commentary