Praying for Departed Loved Ones - Family Tree Healing

SoundingsShort articles (up to 1000 words)in support, extension, criticismor correction to articles previouslypublished in the Journal. Or shortarticles expressing hunches, opinions,thoughts for prayerful consideration,questions, concerns, wisdomand discussion that can stimulatefurther research, scholarship andclinical observation.Praying for DepartedLoved Ones: A CritiqueClinton Conner, M.A., A.C.S.W.Dr. Douglas W. Schoeninger's article(6:l:53b-54) supporting both prayingfor the dead and their being spiritually/communallypresent with usand vice versa ignores the fact that allthirty-one Old Testament referencesto living/dead interaction forbid notonly communication but knowingthem (i.e., relating to them as hesuggests), putting both in the categoryof divination. New TestamentGreek (e.g., Krisis in Heb. 9:27) alsodenotes either a permanent separationor the act of permanentlyseparating the living from the deaduntil time ends.The article also implies (1) somekind of ongoing relating to the deceasedenhances unity in Christ'sBody and (2) our growth and theirs issomehow inhibited without it. Theformer ignores the fact that impartationand imputation are the basesgiven biblically for spiritual unity; therelatedness Schoeninger refers to isthe basis for a soulish unity we'recommanded to put aside. The latterignores the fact that without the terminationof all ongoing relatedness atdeath our growth remains truncatedsimply because we never experiencewhat the Holy Spirit can work in usonly through bona fide separations.To argue as Schoeninger does, takinga release experience intended forus and theologizing that the release isalso for the dead, is not only subjectivebut also antiscriptural. If one isgoing to insist on using peoples' experiencesas a basis for doctrine, thenwe must include everybody's experiences(e.g., Moslems, Hindus, Universalistswho feel their prayers totheir gods help the dead, and realChristians who feel the Holy Spirithas told them to stop [or never start]praying on behalf of the departed).Equally poor exegetically is takingthe experience of God's giving any ofus a "picture" of a deceased lovedone's new state (intended for ourpeace) on into an ongoing relatednessto them. Followed to its logical conclusion,the foregoing, along withpraying for the dead, gives us a part inatonement and redemption, both ofwhich are exclusively Jesus Christ's.Theology drawn from Scriptureahead of experience and traditionsays that only Jesus and the HolySpirit and the dead pray for us, notvice versa.Isaiah prophesies to us that we're apeople with a living God, forbidden toconsult the dead on behalf of the living(Isa. 8:19). People's helpful experiencesought not to be our standardof measure.The Body unity Schoeninger refersto always occurs alongside honoringin Scripture. I'd like to suggest honoringthose already anointed and giventhe ministry of distinguishing betweencounterfeit and divine spiritualexperience(s) (e.g., Walter Martin,Spiritual Counterfeits Project, et al.)by seeking and publishing theircritique of this controversial and tomany of us aberrant position on prayingfor the departed.Praying for the Departed:Response to a CritiqueDouglas W. Schoeninger, Ph.D.Before responding to Clint Conner'scritique of my article, I want to thankhim for offering his perspective. Asmembers of the Body of Christ weneed to be in dialogue, opening ourconvictions to each other and engagingthe process of mutual understandingand correction.I am not able to comment specificallyon the thirty-one Old Testamentreferences to "living/dead interaction,"or on the Greek usage in Heb.9:27. I do not have the knowledgeof Hebrew or Greek required toexamine the nuances of "knowing"and "permanent separation" he refersto. Assuming that Mr. Conner'sinterpretations of these scriptures areaccurate to the original meaning andcontext, I would conclude that Godthrough the Bible is forbidding divinationand that consulting the deadwas part of this practice (that of attemptingto foretell future events ordiscover hidden knowledge by occultor supernatural means).While prayers for, awareness ofcommunion with, or communicationwith the dead can be hidden forms ofdivination, they are not necessarilyso.The prophet in Isa. 8:19 says(NAS) "... should not a people consulttheir God? Should they consultthe dead on behalf of the living?" Tome this scripture seems to speakagainst consulting the dead as opposedto consulting God; in otherwords, an avoidance of God. I amspeaking rather of contact with thedeparted that occurs in the midst ofprayer, in the midst of God's presence.Such an event can be a gift fromGod and is not sought outside of God.There is, of course, a profoundseparation at death. Even if somemeaningful relatedness takes placebetween the living and the dead, thereality of profound separation certainlydominates. And this separationmust be accepted, even in some sensechosen, for the Holy Spirit to work inus through our "bona fide" separations.Any attempt to hang on to theperson who has died and not to lethim or her separate through maintaininga fantasy of her or his presence orby projecting that presence ontoanother human being will eventuallybe damaging and impede the work ofGod in our life, because it is avoidingtruth. For example, a woman whohad experienced the helpful reconcilingpresence of her sister in a dreamshortly after her sister's death tried todream of her husband's presenceafter he died so as to not lose him.The more she tried to program hermind to dream of her husband, themore despairing her life became.Fantasy or imagination that is strictlyself-willed and not created andnourished by the Spirit of God cannotgive life, only death.VOLUME 7, NUMBER 2 50 JOURNAL OF CHRISTIAN HEALING

On the other hand, in the context ofaccepting death and the radical separationthat comes with it and choosingfinally to release the loved one toJesus and allow the chasm to be,sometimes people do experience aform of spiritual communion withsomeone who has died. Granted, experiencesof spiritual communion arenot necessarily contact in the sense ofspiritual intimacy with the departedperson in his or her "present" state.An experience of reconciling contactwith a departed person through healingprayer or in a dream may be simplya gift of reconciliation within thestill-living person, a work that needsto be done in order for the person tobe healed of destructive attitudes,grievances, and inner divisions.However, sometimes experiencesof contact with departed friends orrelatives are experienced as directspiritual communion in the presenceof Jesus Christ and mediated by Him.Such experiences do occur in themidst of prayer—that is, in the midstof communion with Jesus. They arenot sought outside Jesus. They areexperienced as mediated by Jesusand bear marks of the fruit of theSpirit, e.g., forgiveness, reconciliation,mutual understanding, a greaterlove for God, a sense of being in God,and so on. These are not experiencesof divination, that is, calling forth thedead for advice, knowledge, power,and the like. Such experiences in theLord have the quality of gift andmercy, a grace given for the healingof persons and relationships. Theyseem to take place within the resurrectedChrist in whom we all live andmove and have our being. The safety,giftedness, spiritual validity, andmerit of such experiences may relateto the barriers between life and lifeafter death, which were brokenthrough by the death and resurrectionof Jesus.While people's helpful experiencesshould not be the measure of truth,they should always remain a measure.The Christian way is an incarnationalway. God lives in and throughus, calls us to union with His life, andspeaks to us, lives within, is knownwithin human experience. Anyseparating of truth, of knowing, fromexperience separates humans fromtheir bodies and from their integrity,positing truth in some external standardor external tradition; for example,in a particular community's interpretationof Scripture that has come toseem objective and definitive. To giveup the task of interpreting Scripturein the light of the Living Word beingspoken in and through one's experienceis to give up authentic relating.Authentic life in God is not lived byformulas or correct interpretationsbut rather by risking convictions incontext, convictions born of a livingprocess of contending with varioustraditions' interpretations of Scripture,accountability to prayerful discernmentof friends and authorities,deep interior listening for the Spirit'sliving Word as Scripture is interpretedinto one's context.The assumption that a word givento a specific Hebrew community (in aparticular time and context in relationto certain attitudes and practices) canbe applied directly as an objective,self-evident word to another contemporarycontext without question, interpretation,or translation does aninjustice both to each context and to aliving relationship with and in God,through the Spirit. Christian life is notlived by being correct or right, but byrisking life through choosing to livethe movements of the Spirit as onediscerns them. This does not meanlicense to do anything or avoidance ofaccountability to Scripture and toChristian fellowship. It does mean,however, that we can hear and knowGod's voice, albeit imperfectly, andthat one can never abrogate responsibilityfor discerning the truth inone's own experience without abrogatingone's intimacy with God.Each person is responsible for hisor her own conscience. One shouldnever assume that one particularcommunity's interpretation of Scriptureis final or complete or infallible.If I submit my understanding of prayingfor the departed and of experiencesof ongoing relatedness to thedeparted to the Spiritual CounterfeitsProject, it will be to learn and be informedby their critique and toprayerfully listen to the Lord throughtheir critique. I do not abrogate toSCP, or any group, my own responsibilityto discern these experiencesbecause these others are somehowthe ones anointed and called to thistype of discernment. Rather, it is importantto enter into dialogue withthose who seek to discern these mattersin full respect for the wisdom andexperience they bring to the discerningprocess.The following is a summary of myconvictions:1. Prayers for the dead or requestsfor their intercessions need notimply any relationship or contactbetween the living and the dead.They may be simply prayers toJesus.2. If a person is convicted throughprayerful study of Scripture thatshe or he should not pray for thedead, then he or she should not.However, if people find thatthrough prayer and study ofScripture the Lord is movingthem to pray to Him on behalf ofthe dead or to call on the intercessionsof the departed throughHim, why forbid such a practice?Should anyone on principle orbecause of a particular tradition'sinterpretation of Scripture stop apractice of speaking to Jesusabout anything she or he ismoved to speak to Him about? Ifhe or she is misinterpreting Hisword, won't He correct her or himthrough earnest study of the writtenword and seeking His face?3. People are sometimes given aninterior image or sense of a departedloved one to put them atease, to give them confidencethat their loved one is, indeed,with the Lord. Also, in imagination,through a dream, or simplydeep in one's spirit one may experiencea reconciling communicationwith someone who hasdied. These may simply be giftsfor the interior peace and healingof the person and do not necessarilyconstitute contact or communicationwith the dead. Theymay be simply interior consolationsand resolutions enabled bythe Spirit.4. Sometimes experiences such asthose noted above seem to reflecta living exchange or a communionbeyond words ('e.g., a mutualpresence in love) with someonewho has died. There may be withsuch events a knowing of Jesus'presence and permission, anopening the way and leading.JOURNAL OF CHRISTIAN HEALING 51 VOLUME 7, NUMBER 2

These experiences are known asmediated by, through, and inJesus. The question whether theyrepresent direct contact or not isnot seen as relevant because theexperience is one of being withthe other in Jesus.People also report visitationsfrom a departed loved one thatseem to bear fruit either in termsof helping the departed person orin receiving help from a departedperson who appears as a messengerfrom God. These experiencesare not sought. They simplyhappen. They are experiencedas in the Lord and permitted bythe Lord.One person reported to me thatone night she awakened and hadthe impression someone was sittingon her bed. The figure wasshadowy and could not be seenclearly, but was clearly the shapeof a human being. In a momentshe knew it was the presence ofher departed father. He seemedto be asking for help, but he couldnot speak. She spoke to himabout Jesus, explaining His forgivinglove, and forgave him herself.Then she pointed him toJesus, whom she could nowsee standing there with them. Herfather seemed reluctant, afraid,and confused, but graduallybegan to turn and after some timeas she prayed left the room withJesus and seemed to brighten upas he went. The woman experienceda deep relief within herbeing and a lightening of herspirit.A man approached me during aworkshop and said he believedthe Lord wanted him to tell meabout an experience he had whenclose to death. He was hospitalizedafter a heart attack andwas being monitored when hisheart went into another spasm.He thought he was dying andbegan to experience himself "going."The medical team wasworking on him furiously, but hefelt distant and removed fromtheir activity. Suddenly hismother (who had died years before)appeared in a vision andspoke to him. He said it was notlike a mental image but rather areal vision of her presence. Shesaid, "Stuart, it is not yet time foryou to die—go back." From thatmoment, he began to recover.During this moment of"contact," Stuart said, he waswrapped in light and sensed theLord's presence.There is no proof that either orany of these experiences representstrue contact or communionwith the departed. All we can sayis that many of them bear fruit inhealing, in deepening faith inJesus Christ, in drawing the personinto a deeper, more personalrelationship with Him. Andpeople who have such experiencesbelieve the contact is real.They know their experience to bedifferent from a mental image.5. Since Jesus lives and ministersthrough His Body, I do not find it"aberrant" in the negative sensethat persons sometimes experiencethe departed helping themor themselves being called to helpthe departed, or Jesus openingthe way at times to experiencing adeep communion of love (or evenconsultation) with a departedloved one. Such communing withthose who are close to Jesus isprobably "ordinary" within ourspirit as we become increasinglyyielded to the Holy Spirit. Whatis rare is the conscious experiencingof such communion.6. God speaks within our experience.So do other voices andspirits. Therefore we must bediscerning, and our discernmentmust contend prayerfully withthe written Word, Scripture.However, I do not see any reasonChristians should be afraid per seto examine the practices and experiencesof any religion to try tosee what is going on there. A particulardesire toward and practiceof "helping" the dead in anotherreligion is not necessarily evil ordistorted in and of itself. Peoplemay have a genuinely loving desireto help the dead and maygenuinely perceive that theyneed help. Such a desire is good.The implementation of that desiremay lead to evil or distortionbecause the saving power, protection,and love of Jesus Christis not known and therefore themovement is not completed inHim and is subject to the distortionsand manipulations of evil.I can see no reason not to investigatethese practices of otherreligions. If we are seeking truthin the Lord, He will instruct us asto what is valid and what isdangerous in those practices.Christians sometimes endangerthemselves by assigning to theenemy all practices and spiritualinsights and ways associatedwith non-Christian religions. Inthis way we give over to Satanenergies, understandings, andforms of relating that werecreated by God and need to becentered in Him and governed byHis Spirit.7. As Christians we are to be cocreatorsand coredeemers withChrist. His atonement and redemptionare both complete inHim and ongoing in and throughus. We are to grow into beingChrist in the world. We are HisBody.8. The danger in spiritual experiencesof relatedness to the departedlies in their being sought inopposition to God's call and themovement of His Spirit, especiallyto gain power, avoid lossand separation, acquire spiritualknowledge, and so on. Thereforeone's spiritual maturity as wellas one's particular giftedness,woundedness, and calling bear arelationship to the spiritual validity,safety, and value of suchexperiences.What is dangerous spiritualterritory for one person may beanother person's special calling.Sometimes the danger is based inone's previous experiences withoccult phenomena or commitmentsand therefore relates tospiritual trauma in one's life or tovulnerability to deception ordoublemindedness. Sometimessuch vulnerabilities are rooted inone's ancestry, where occultpractices and commitments mayhave been present.9. While many people may have experiencesof contact with the departedat some time in their lives,such experiences are certainly infrequent,perhaps once in alifetime for most. More frequentwith some is a sense of deepcommunion and ongoing love andexchange in the Spirit with thedeparted, a sort of backgroundVOLUME 7, NUMBER 2 52 JOURNAL OF CHRISTIAN HEALING

awareness that is heightened atcertain moments. My own experiencewith focusing onspecific departed persons inprayer either to pray for them orto ask for their intercessions isthat sometimes I sense the Lord'sencouragement and leading,while often I sense His clear wordto keep "hands off." I find mycomfort and safety in focusing onJesus.Again, I want to thank Mr. Connerfor his response to my article,and to encourage this kind of dialogueto continue and broaden. We mustbring our convictions to each other toseek mutual understanding of ouragreements and disagreements. Godwill work His Truth within andamong us as we listen to each other'struth.Douglas Schoeninger, Ph.D., is vicepresident of The Institute for ChristianHealing and Editor of the Journalof Christian Healing.//;^ doctoraldegree is in clinical psychology fromthe University of Wisconsin. He is adeacon in the Presbyterian Church.Praying for the Departed:Theological ReflectionsRobert T. Sears, S.J.Clint Connor's response to DouglasSchoeninger's short reflection hasraised a number of issues of importancefor the healing ministry. Connerargues: (1) that the OT forbids notonly communication with but alsoknowing the dead and that this permanentseparation extends also to theNT; (2) that such communication isnecessarily "soulish" rather than"spiritual" and hence prevents thespiritual growth that full separationwould bring; (3) that Scripture ratherthan experience is the Christian'snorm for action and that Scriptureonly affirms that "Jesus and the HolySpirit and the dead pray for us, notvice versa." This last point raises(4) the question of the Christian'srelationship to other religions andpractices. Dr. Schoeninger has respondedto these issues from his owntheologically reflected pastoral experience.I offer the following specificallytheological reflections as acontribution to this importantdiscussion.On the first point, it is certainlytrue that the OT forbids communicationwith the dead, which was then aform of divination practiced in religionssurrounding Judaism. Howdeeply rooted the practice was can beseen where Saul consults the"Medium of Endor" (1 Sam. 28:7) tocall Samuel back for consultationafter he had previously driven outmediums and fortunetellers from theland! Such mediums were to bestoned (Lev. 20:27;'! Sam. 28:3-9),so Saul had to promise the lady protection.The purpose of such consultingof the dead, or necromancy, wasto seek information Yahweh withheld(1 Sam. 28); it led people to reject Hisword in favor of a reply from the underworld(Isa. 8:13, 19-20). It is anabomination in Yahweh's eyes(Deut. 18:11-12), "apostasy" fromYahweh ("rebellion" [JB] 1 Chron.10:13f.) which defiles the Israelite(Lev. 19:31). According to officialYahwism the dead no longer knowanything about this world (Job 14:21;21:21; Eccl. 9:5f., 10).Even though the OT knows no "interchange"between the living andthe dead, it does acknowledge thepower of God over this realm, whichgives rise to a changed perspective inthe NT. In the OT God sends peopleto Sheol and also can lead them forth(1 Sam. 2:6; Wisd. Sol. 16:13). Ps.16:8-11 shows this same conviction,but in Acts 2:24-28 it is applied not toDavid but to Jesus. God hassovereignly broken open the gates ofSheol through raising Jesus from thedead. Thus Jesus now ascends anddescends (Rom 10:7f; Eph. 4:8ff.);He opens heaven and the realm of thedead. He overcomes the last enemy,death, by His cross/resurrection (1Cor. 15:26) and has the power tocommunicate this victory to others(Rev. 1:18 "I was dead, but see I liveand have the keys to death and theunderworld").This victory over death is extendedto believers through Jesus' resurrec-tion. "In Baptism," Paul says, "youwere not only buried with him butalso raised to life with him becauseyou believed in the power of God whoraised him from the dead" (Col.2:12). Christ rules "over living anddead" (Rom. 14:9),Hehas been givenpower to have life "in himself" (John5:26), and a time is coming when allthose "in their tombs shall hear hisvoice and come forth" (John 5:28). Itis because of Jesus' power over Sheol(hell) that He can promise the churchdeliverance from its power (Matt.16:18) and give the power of forgivenessfrom heaven (Mark 2:10; Matt.18:18; John 20:22).All this may be conceded, but thequestion remains when this powerover death is given to believers. Isthere a permanent separation untilthe Last Judgment (as Mr. Connorargues from Heb. 9:27 Krisis) or is the"last judgment" in some way now7Both views can be appealed fromScripture.While Paul initially saw Jesus' resurrectionas model of our future resurrection(see 1 Thess. 4:14), he increasinglypresented it as "cause" ofour resurrection (as Phil. 3:20-21 "hewill give a new form to this lowlybody of ours and remake it accordingto the pattern of his glorified body byhis power to subject everything tohimself"; also 1 Cor. 15:25-28, 45).Still later (2 Cor., Gal., Rom.) he beginsto see Christ's dying and risingalready at work in this life (see Rom.6:3-11). Finally, the captivity lettersspeak of salvation as present (Col.3:1-4 "you have been raised up";Eph. 2:5 "you have been saved"). 1The present power of Jesus' resurrectionis presented in Luke (see 23:43"this day you will be with me inparadise"), in John (see John 11, theraising of Lazarus: "I Am the resurrectionand life . . . whoever is aliveand believes in me will never die"),and even in Matt. 27:51-53 "the deadsaints rose and appeared to many" asa sign of Jesus' victory. We arejudged in this view by how we respondto Jesus' coming (John 3:19;12:31; 15:11) or how we respond toJesus' offer of forgiveness (Luke23:43).Jesus' death and resurrection establishesa "new time," a new possi-JOURNAL OF CHRISTIAN HEALING 53 VOLUME 7, NUMBER 2

ility of going from death to life. Theproclamation of this possibility ismade available even to the dead in theview of 1 Pet. 3:18-20, 4:6 as well asJohn 5:25. This preaching occurs inthe afterlife, however one thinks ofthe possibility of conversion afterdeath. In 1 Cor. 15:29 Paul arguesfrom a practice of being baptized onbehalf of the dead which presupposesthe possibility of changing their lot.First Peter implies both a descent intodeath by Christ and an offer of newlife through his resurrection. In thiscase the judgment (or Krisis) doesseparate the good from the bad, but itoccurs when the death and resurrectionof Jesus is effectively proclaimedand either accepted or rejected. In 1Cor. 15:29 it is believed to happen bythe action of baptism of those whoare living. Thus in Christ we have anew relation to the dead, thoughprayer for the dead was alreadypraised in the LXX (Septuagint)Book of Maccabees (12:43-46).Jesus' resurrection opens a new realityfor the dead, a reality that is bothalready operative as well as to beconsummated at the end of time.Second, in view of this new realityis all communication with those whohave gone ahead "soulish" ratherthan "spiritual"? Scripturally, thesoul (psyche) refers primarily to ourhuman or earthly life with its feelingsand emotions, though it can also referto our supernatural life (see Matt.10:28, etc.). As earthliness it isbounded by death and has to undergothat transition in order to enjoy resurrectedlife. Spirit (pneuma) is myinner life (breath from God) as openbeyond itself ultimately to God. 2Spirit implies movement (as wind) bywhich we cry "Abba" (Gal. 4:6;Rom. 8:15) and recognize Jesus asLord (1 Cor. 12:3) and become giftsfor one another in the Christiancommunity (1 Cor. 12:7). Spirit includesthe whole person as open toGod; it includes the body. The Christianfaith acknowledges a resurrectionof the body, not a separate immortalityof the soul. Since humanexistence is interpersonal existence,it would make no sense to have Jesusresurrected with no other humanssharing that existence with Him. Infact, the church is the "body ofChrist" (1 Cor. 6:15), and as husbandand wife it forms "one body" withChrist (Eph. 5:32). Since this spiritualunion of love is said to be "withoutend" (1 Cor. 13:13), death is not therepresented as "unbridgeable separation"but as a different form of union.Considerations such as this explainthe development in the early churchof devotion to the saints. 3 At first ittook the form of devotion to the martyrs,but since they were seen to bewith Christ in glory, belief in theirintercessory power grew. From thethird century on, Origen, Cyril ofJerusalem, Chrysostom, GregoryNazianzen, and the like all argue insupport of prayers for patronage ofthe saints. Against criticism of thepractice (by pagans like Julian theApostate and Christians like Vigilantius)Jerome argued "that if the apostlesand martyrs prayed for theirfellow-Christians when still alive, itwas natural to believe that theywould do so all the more now thatthey were crowned with heavenlyglory." 4 About the same time wehave evidence from gravestone inscriptionsand prayers about intercessionson behalf of the dead. Themain source in the Western churchfor this belief in a state betweenheaven and hell of purification (latercalled Purgatory) was Augustine. 5 Heand others argued from such texts as1 Cor. 3:15 and Matt. 12:31-32 thatsouls basically open to God could behelped by the prayers of the churchand could in turn pray for the church.Thus there is a solid tradition ofChristian faith supporting prayer forthe departed and requests for theirintercession to the degree they areseen to be with Christ.But what about direct communicationwith the departed? Since the NTview differs from the OT and does notspecifically address this question, wecan only argue indirectly from NTprinciples. Granted an ongoingspiritual communion of love betweenthe living and departed in Christ, andgranted this is "bodily" to the extentthat it shares Christ's resurrection,such communion must be able inprinciple to come to expression if andwhen authorized by Christ. Since theNT does not affirm or condemn sucha possibility, one would have to ap-peal to general criteria of discernmentas to when such communicationsare "in Christ" or not. Dr.Schoeninger's response offers severalhelpful criteria: "forgiveness,reconciliation, mutual understanding,a greater love for God, a sense ofbeing in God, and so on."Divination, or seeking advice fromthe dead, would be forbidden in theNT as in the OT, since all communicationneeds to be centered in Christ.Just as with the Charismatic gifts ofprophecy, healing, word of knowledge,and the like there are counterfeitswhich draw people away God toego-centered power, so there can becommunications from the departedthat substitute for God and are idols.But just as true prophecy and otherlike gifts are not to be rejected on thataccount, neither should (it wouldseem) communications that releaseobstacles to more total communionwith God. They would have to correspondto the pattern of Jesus' death/resurrection/sending of the Spirit(the criterion for the "new family'' inChrist) if they are authentic. I wouldsuggest criteria similar to those regardingcelibate relationships: 61. Am I releasing the person toGod as Abraham sacrificedIsaac and as Jesus instructedhis disciples when he said "Itisgood for you that I go away"(John 16:7)?2. Does this communication openme more deeply and freely toGod and other people?3. Am I trusting God rather thantrying to control the communicationmyself?4. Am I consulting a spirituallycompetent director, friend, orcommunity regarding this experience?If these criteria are present and thefruits are good, it would seem to methe experience is in Christ's Spirit.Third, the need here to use personaldiscernment raises the issue ofthe relationship of experience toScripture in directing our Christianliving. Dr. Schoeninger argues fromthe need of each Christian to takeresponsibility for one's personal relationshipto God while respectingScripture and the views of others.VOLUME 7, NUMBER 2 54 JOURNAL OF CHRISTIAN HEALING

From the point of view of theologicalmethod, it is important to see thatScripture itself is the product of religiousexperience and was accepted ascanonical only after the communalexperience of the church so determined.The main texts from which most ofour arguments for the afterlife stemare Paul's, and he asserts that he doesnot know Christ according to theflesh or human schooling but by revelation(Gal. 1:12; 2 Cor. 5:16f). Whathe was shown in his religious experienceon the road to Damascus (Acts9:1-5 etc.) was the identification ofChrist with Christians and the universalmission of Christians to theGentiles. It was not Scripture thattaught him this but religious experience.Based solely on Scripture (onlythe OT was then so called), he waspersecuting Christians. Out of his experienceof the risen Lord Jesus hewas freed from the Law (which evenScripture can become if separatedfrom religious experience) and experiencedsalvation as a free gift ofgrace. When the NT was finally acceptedby the early church as "Scripture"(a process that took more thantwo hundred years of sifting and deciding)7 the main criterion used wasapostolic origin, but the decision wasultimately made by the church'ssense of the faith—that is, by thefaith experience of the community.Besides the establishment of Scripture,its interpretation also depends' on the experience of the interpreter.How otherwise can the differencesamong Christians of good faith beexplained, since all appeal to thesupport of Scripture. Theology is increasinglyaware that one's conversionexperience colors the way onelooks at anything—Scripture included.8 The closer we get to the experienceof the original authors themore accurate our interpretationswill be, but that means we need totrust our experience as one pole oftheological method.Fourth, is only specifically "Christian"experience relevant? Whatabout the insights of Freud intohuman nature (though he wasexplicitly an atheist), or the religiousexperience of Moslems, Hindus, orBuddhists, or the political experienceof Marxists, or the psychic experienceof those who claim to have experiencedapparitions? Since all revelationis mediated through humanexperience, all experience is relevant,though not every interpretation of theexperience. Freud's insights into theunconscious defense mechanisms ofreligious people is certainly important,but not his discarding of religionas illusion because of them. OT andChristian prophets were equally criticalof religious attitudes of their daybut did not deny God because ofthem. Similarly, the experience ofMoslems of humble reverence beforeAllah, of Hindus of the universality ofGod's presence, of Universalists whopray for the departed and extend loveto them, can all gift the Christian desiringto open to the fullness of God'struth. Each experience, however,would need to be interpreted in lightof Christ's death/resurrection/sendingof the Spirit. There remains forthe Christian an open invitation tofind God in every aspect of Creationand to bring it into submission toChrist, who submits all to God (1 Cor.15:28).In sum, there is a solid Christiantradition supporting prayer for thedeparted and petition for their intercession.In no place does the NTexplicitly consider possible communicationbetween the living anddead, but since in Christ there is aspiritual bond, it would seem suchcommunication is possible and to bejudged by ordinary rules of discernment.Because of different experiencesand traditions Christians may____________________________________differ regarding these questions, butit is hoped mutual respect will bringever-increasing light to this importantarea. Evidence suggests prayer forthe dead can heal the living, 9 so onecould err as much by neglecting suchprayer as by misusing it. Let each onefollow what seems to be "goodnews" for her or him in Christ.Reference Notes1. David Stanley, Christ's Resurrection inPauline Soteriology (Rome: PontificalBiblical Institute, 1961), pp. 74-80, points outthis developmental view of Paul.2. See George T. Montague, Riding theWind (Ann Arbor: Word of Life, 1974), pp.21-35, for a clear presentation of the biblicalview.3. See J. N. D. Kelly, Early ChristianDoctrines, rev. ed. (New York: Harper &Row, 1978), chap. 18, for the main lines ofthis development.4. Ibid., p. 491 (citing C. Vigil 6).5. See Jacques Le Goff, The Birth ofPurgatory, trans. Arthur Goldhammer(Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1984),esp. pp. 61-85.6. See my "Trinitarian Love andMale-Female Community," Journal ofChristian Healing 6:1 (1984): 37-38.7. See Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines, pp.56-60.8. See Bernard J. F. Lonergan, Method inTheology (New York: Herder & Herder, 1972)for an exhaustive grounding of this position.9. See Kenneth McAII, Healing the FamilyTree (London: Sheldon Press, 1982) formany cases. His article in the Journal ofChristian Healing (5:1 [1983]: 24-27) "RitualMourning in Anorexia Nervosa" shows theeffect of such prayer for victims of thatsyndrome.____________________________________Robert T. Sears is a Jesuit priest anda professor of theology formerly ofthe Jesuit School of Theology inChicago, now teaching at the Instituteof Pastoral Studies at LoyolaUniversity there. He received hisLicentiate in Theology in Germany in1966 (Sankt Georgen, Frankfurt/Main) and his Ph.D. from FordhamUniversity, Bronx, N.Y., in 1974. Heserves on the Editorial Board of theJournal.JOURNAL OF CHRISTIAN HEALING55VOLUME 7, NUMBER 2

Praying for the Departed:Forbidden Now as ThenClint Conner, M.S., A.C.S.W.Although the explicit statements ofScripture are the first source for theologiansformulating doctrine, DougSchoeninger's reply to me on prayingfor/communicating with the deadcontains no biblical references for hisposition. In addition, Father Searsconcludes his remarks by saying thatin "no place does the New Testamentexplicitly consider possible communicationbetween the living and thedead."Scripture not only nowhere explicitlyencourages praying for or communicatingwith the deceased, it also setsout some very explicit injunctionsagainst such interaction. And eventhough those references all may befound in the Old Testament, God isthe same yesterday, today, and forever(Heb. 13:8).Old Testament Hebrew usesyid'onim (e.g., Lev. 19:31; 20:6; 1Sam. 28:3-15) or b'ob (as in 1 Chron.10:13) in this connection. Both termsmean (1) divining demons alleging tobe spirits of deceased persons and(2) the medium through whom thespirits divine. The sense of these termsis rendered "he who seeks unto thedead.'"While on the subject of Scripture, Ishould note that only Roman Catholiccommentators attach a purgatory-exegesis(i.e., asserting that the state ofthe deceased can be changed) to Matt.12:31, 32; John 5:25; 1 Cor. 3:15;15:29; and 1 Pet. 3:18-20, all cited byFather Sears. All other commentaries,including the International CriticalCommentary, describe the passages inJohn and 1 Peter as referring to a onetimepreaching by Jesus to those whodied before his first advent, givingthem one opportunity to respond tothe gospel. Neither the Greek of thosetexts nor any other scripture supportsan ongoing, present, right-now provisionof opportunity for the dead to repentor have others repent on their behalfor both.For example, see the references inEphesians to Jesus' descending whenhe preached to the dead, then ascendingonce to a heavenly throne where henow awaits the completion of thechurch and his second advent.Neither does the passage in 1 Corinthians15 point to a possible alterationin the state of the dead. Paul isn't advocatingbaptism for the dead; here heis arguing to the Corinthians the inconsistencyof Greeks who discountJesus' resurrection yet believe in theconcept to the point of being baptizedon behalf of the dead.The Greek of the other 1 Corinthianspassage (3:15) refers to a post-,not pre-Judgment Day time frame.Matt. 12:31, 32 contains a teaching onthe eternal unforgivableness of the unpardonablesin; it does not introduce adoctrine allowing forgiveness of sin insome domain between earth andheaven, a doctrine that is taught neitherin that passage nor anywhere elsein the New Testament.And despite assertions to the effectthat the closer we get to the experienceof the original authors the more reliableand valid our teaching is, it alsoshould be pointed out that many of thesources Father Seats refers to are thirdcentury C.E. and later. This period notonly is removed from the early church[apostolic] era, but it also falls duringthe Dark Ages, so named (amongother reasons) for the doctrinal errorthat originated then. Although bothScripture and first-century historyclearly encourage following the examplesof the saints (Heb. 12:1, 2 andPaul's "imitate me as I imitateChrist"), nowhere do they refer to devotionto saints as Father Sears suggests,any more than they do to purgatoryor praying for the dead or both.Schoeninger concludes his initial articleby saying the deceased sometimescan't be fully free if we've "restrictedour relating to and prayer for them"(emphasis mine). And in his subsequentresponse, in this issue of theJournal, he speaks of both communicationand communion with the dead.Thus he enlarges the issue in bothpieces well beyond that of praying toJesus on behalf of the dead, makingneither unity nor separation in theBody of Christ the question as he suggests,but rather the state of the deadand communication with and ministryto them!If the dead need our ministry thenheaven is imperfect. And if the potentialexists to alter one's state afterdeath, then not only are the meaningand purpose of life diminished and alteredfrom what we're told in bothScripture and historical accounts; thenature of justice and God himself alsoare done irreparable damage and mustbe adjusted to accommodate the sameunorthodox inconsistency any interim"judgment" theology involves.Schoeninger begins his response bysaying that while prayers/communication"can be hidden forms of divinationthey aren't necessarily so," despitethe fact that historically bothhave always been considered to be. Sumerian,2 Babylonian, and Assyrianrecords from the mounds of buriedMesopotamian cities include accountsof apparitions of and communicationwith the dead along with other spiritisticphenomena we now call necromancy.3Early church historians also definedtrafficking with the spirits of the dead(meaning both apparitions and communication)as occult. Clement ofRome refers to communication withthe dead as being accomplished "bythe art which is called necromancy." 4Tertullian said both apparitions andcommunication with the dead were accomplished"not by the spirits of thedeceased but by impersonating demons."Augustine, too, repeatedly ascribedsuch appearances and visions tothe power of demons. 5Schoeninger next moves into a seriesof comments (1) implying the validityof experiences if they occur inthe midst of communing prayers to Jesus,thereby raising experience abovethe level ordinarily afforded it bytheology; (2) appearing to elevate hispersonal discernment above the assessmentsof those anointed and appointedby the Holy Spirit to the roleof trying/testing/confirming in theBody of Christ at large; and (3) concludingin the second of his nine pointswith what appears to be a question butis really an assumption: Jesus will correctthe sincere when he or she misinterprets.Regarding no. 1, I don't know ofanyone who is ready to say all she or hehas experienced in prayer is valid; ifthat were true. Scripture wouldn't giveVOLUME 7, NUMBER 2 56 JOURNAL OF CHRISTIAN HEALING

us such a variety of measurements fortesting the validity of all our spiritualexperiences, including those we havein prayer. In fact, it was in the midst ofcommuning with Jesus that Peter receiveda demonically inspired assertion(Matt. 6:23).Regarding Schoeninger's secondpoint, Scripture in fact has been interpreted.It only remains to be applied.It alone is authoritative with a capitalA, and orthodox exegesis has alwaysmeasured everyone's experiences byit, not vice versa. Such exegesis hasnever elevated experience to a par withthe written Word.The third point above ignores somethingJesus said clearly: that ratherthan correct error he would purposelyallow it to remain as is so that the validand the heretical would stand side byside, with increasing visibility beinggiven to both. For example, when Jesusentered Jerusalem he still hadn'tbrought to an end the disciples' sinfulnarcissism and judgments of one anotherover who would be greatest inthe kingdom — arguments that hadfirst surfaced three years earlier (seeMatt. 20:20-28).In his sixth and eighth points,Schoeninger's imputation of fears,prior experiences, traumas, et al., intothe argument only muddies the waters.We are discussing neither fears ofa living relatedness — of which, likeSchoeninger, I have none — nor "unhealedhealers" and counselors. Weare talking, rather, about the vast majorityof us outside the "Romanstream" who have experienced validhealing ministry in our lives for everythingfrom ancestral inheritance andprior occult involvement to prior familyexperiences as Schoeninger has, butwho still find prayers to the deceasedor for them or both (whether Mary,the saints, relatives, friends, or acquaintances)to be invalid on spiritual,intellectual, historical, logical, andscriptural grounds.The theme (explicit in places andimplicit throughout) of Schoeninger'scomments is that prayer/communicationwith the deceased is valid because(1) it makes us feel better and (2) it hasoccurred during prayers that maintaina focus on Jesus. No experience isvalid simply because we seem to gainrelease in association with it. Andboth his and Father Sears' commentscontinue to beg the question of documentationthat the felt release is spiritualand from Jesus as opposed topsychological and resulting from auto-suggestionthat often is not discernedand rooted out of our personalemotional responses to prayers — i.e.,calling our answers to our prayersGod's answers.The same can be said for the personalexperiences of the woman andman Schoeninger refers to: they aren'tnecessarily valid because they madepeople who had them feel good! In aday when we're told to watch for theappearance and attempted interminglingof the valid and counterfeit,every variety of person (some bornagain, some claiming to be, and someadamantly denying being so) is havinghappy beyond-and-back experiencesof his own and with the deceased. Forthat reason alone it behooves us tocome up with valid criteria for measuringthose experiences, criteria thatgo well beyond felt release and a Jesusfocusduring prayer, as well as personswho can discern their validity.It's fine to conclude (point 9) thatwe find focus, safety, and comfort inJesus, as long as all of us in everyChristian stream recognize mutuallythat Jesus repeatedly named and castout religious (that is, party) spirits.Such spirits infected not only the otherreligious streams of Christ's day buthis own as well, indeed among theTwelve.We all need continued ministry(from the Holy Spirit, not the dead) tomove us from our present stage of deliveranceof the religious spirit oppressingour particular stream towhere we should be and will be whenEph. 4:13 is fulfilled. Only then willwe be able to see that bothSchoeninger's position and my ownnow fall short.Despite that, it is nice to be bathingin "streams" flowing toward the sameRiver, out of our armed camps on oppositebanks. I trust the content ofwhat I have said and the spirit in whichit is sent moves us further toward thekind of unity pointed up in the Ephesiansreference, a unity for which weall long.Reference Notes1. Thomas W. Davies, Magic,Divination, and Demonology Among theHebrews and Their Neighbors(New York: Ktav, 1898), p. 7.2. L. B. Payton, Spiritism and the Cull ofthe Dead in Antiquity (n.p., n.d.).3. Leonard Mash, The Apocatastasis orProgress Backwards (n.p.,n.d.}.4. Clement of Rome Homilies 1.5.5. Augustine Apology 23; de CivitateDei 2.24, 26; 28.5.________________________________Clint Conner, A.C.S.W., is directorof the Christian Mental Health Clinicof Central Ohio. With his wife, Bonnie,he has developed a prayer-therapyinner healing approach to treatment.Conner received his graduate degree insocial work from the University ofChicago in 1967. He is the author ofNot Without Cure, published byWhitaker House________________________________.JOURNAL OF CHRISTIAN HEALING 57 VOLUME 7, NUMBER 2