The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1881-03-09
For the Central Presbyterian.
The Burial of the Dead"

Inc CentTdG ETeS0yteTadn or FEBRUARY
9th, contains an article over the sigma
ture of F. j., criticising the chapter of
the Revised Directory on "the Burial of
the Dead" to which 1 wish to say few
things in reply.
l. Speaking of the passages of Scrip
ture selected for reading at the opening
of the service " to be used when no
minister is present to officiate," he says:
81 Peter i: "a, 25, is so strangely mis-
quoted (and with marks of quotation too)
as to suggest great haste or extreme care
lessness on the part of the Committee OF
Revision" In reply, 1 would say, the
quotation is not from l Peter i: "a, Is,
at all but from Isaiah xl: 6-9, and if
F. j" will consult his Bible he will see
that the quotation is correctly made,
word for word.
2. in the form of prayer directed,
the words, doth not willingly afflict,'
should be substituted for doSt not, the
word dost being neither scriptural nor
grammatical. What Of. j. means by
saying that the word dost is not scrip
tural hardly know If he means it is
not used In Scripture, he is certainly mis-
taken, as any one who will examine the
many passages quoted in any concord
ance can see. When he says it is not
grammatical" [ take issue with him.
If the sentence were a statement respect
ing God, made by one man to another,
as it is in Samuel iii: 33, "He doth not
willingly afflict," doth would be correct.
But here, it forms part of prayer, in
which the speaker is addressing God
and in such case, doSt, and not doth is
required. In confederation of this opin-
ion, let me say, the sentence criticised is
quoted literally from the Liturgy of the
Reformed Dutch) Church"
3. Speaking of "some suitable and SOL
emn form of words" to be used at the
grave, "F. j." says: 81 would suggest
that witha slight modification, that used
by the Protestant Episcopal Church
would be very satisfactory. 1t is GER
talnly very solemn-as solemn as human
language could well be. The modifca-
ton suggested is simply to omit the
words our deceased brother Cor sister)'
SO as to read, When they come to the
grave, and while the earth shall be cast
upon the body by some standing by, the
minister shall say Forasmuch as it hath
pleased Almighty God, in his wise pro-
violence, to take out of this world the
soul of the deceased, we therefore com
nit his or her body to the ground, earth
to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust,
waiting for the general resurrection in
the last day, and the life of the world to
come through our Lord Jesus Christ; at
whose coming in glorious majesty to
judge the world, the earth and the sea
shall give up their dead, and the corrup-
tible bodies of those who sleep in Him
shall be changed, and made like unto his
glorious body, according to the mighty
working whereby he is able to subdue all
things unto himself"
In reply to this would say, such a
form as this is most appropriate and
scriptural at the burial of Christian, or
one who in the judgment of charity is
Christian; but at the burial of an openly
irreligious man, it cannot be used with
out associating the hopes of the gospel
with the close of an obviously Christless
Tor wagodly, if F. j." prefers that word)
life" And this brings us at once, face
to face, with the insuperable difficulty,
as [ regard it, of any form for common
use in the Burial of the Dead"
The brief form given "to be used at
sea, or when no minister is present to Of
iciate," is of such character that it NAV
be used at the burial of the Christian and
the ungodly alike; but it is not such as
the Scriptures suggest for the burial { e
the Christian, in such passages as l Thess.
iv: 1918. There are truths revealed
and hopes made known in Gods word,
with which we are "to comfort one an
Other" in such circumstances, of which |
it takes no notice; and of which it can
take no notice without rendering it unfit
for use at the burial of the ungodly.
The burial services of the Protestant
Episcopal, the Methodist Episcopal, the
Reformed (Dutch), the Lutheran, and the |
Huguenot Churches-and l have exam |
ined them all with care-are all of them
burial services appropriate for use at the
burial Of the Christian, but altogether
inappropriate and unscriptural for use at
the burial of the confessedly irreligious.
And yet, as a matter of fact, they are
commonly used at the burial Of all alike
and this is SO, although in the Protestant
Episcopal Prayer Book there is a rubric
evidently intended to restrict the use of
this service to the burial of such as are,
in the judgment Of charity, Christians.
In view of this fact, the question nat
urally arises, Why is this so? The an