Showing posts with label Heath. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Heath. Show all posts

Tuesday 6 January 2015

Nuisance, Public Health, Disease.




434. Nuisance, Public Health, Disease.—A cemetery is not a nuisance per se, but if it is proved that the burial of dead bodies in a certain cemetery does injure the public health and is a fruitful source of transmission of disease, the State may prohibit such burial at certain places within cities or adjacent to dwellings. But unless authorized by the Legislature a council has no right by ordinance to provide that no one shall be buried within half a mile of any habitation or public thoroughfare. And where the Legislature authorized a city to remove the bodies interred and allow streets through the land, it had authority to do so.

Tuesday 18 September 2012

Katherine Heath Died 1st January 1709

Katherine Heath Died 1st January 1709

Hemblington - All Saints [Link]

© Godric Godricson

William Heath Died 14th July 1747


William Heath Died 14th July 1747

Hemblington - All Saints [Link]

© Godric Godricson


Karl Barth and "Wonderment"


Hemblington - All Saints [Link]

© Godric Godricson
For Barth, the ‘study of God’  inherent in the term ‘theologian’ is not enough to define his own specific perception of what it is to be a  ‘theologian’ and I want to say something about Barth and his view of "Wonderment".
Theology is ‘real’ for Barth and framed within the human experience of time and space rather than being a purely dry or dusty academic pursuit. Theological study is not some ‘fantastical’ pursuit or  the study of some heroic fable set in some remote and mythological time. Unlike the story of Gilgamesh or mythical stories from the Middle East, the history of Jesus is real for Barth and what may be described as the ‘Risen Christ’ is to be discovered and pursued in both an historical period but also in humanities  continuing encounter with the mystical reality of God. Barth is not describing a new 'Osiris', a death cult or anything other than the 'Risen Christ'.
The normal tools of the theologian in the study of the reality of God are not enough for Barth who tries to step outside of human experience and  who presents the concept of theological ‘wonder’ as a central feature of how the theologian may conceptualise  God and perhaps then go on to encounter God through Jesus as the second personality of the triune God.  Barth has a very clear conception of the role and nature of theology, defined in opposition to totalitarian oppression, that may be at variance with more usually accepted conceptualisations in a more liberal and ‘humanistic’ tradition . 
Hemblington - All Saints [Link]

© Godric Godricson
Barth may be seen to define ‘ wonder’ occurring “when someone encounters a spiritual or natural phenomen that he has never encountered before”.  
However, Barth indicates that the pursuit of theology  and  theological ‘wonderment’  leaves an indelible imprint on the theologian  and this is for Barth is expressed in terms that sound similar to descriptions of an ordination in that unspecified ‘indelible’ changes occur. The person who studies theology and experiences theological “wonderment” is said to be “afflicted” by theology. It is clear that, for Barth, there is an intensity involved in the study of theology and one suspects that in the ideas of Barth there is a personal cost involved in the pursuit of theology. Barth is arguably stating  that there is a cost  to the individual in encountering the Risen Christ that cannot be found in other study and research? Intense and committed; as the ideas of Barth undoubtedly are, how do we analyse Barth’s arguments and evaluate them? Certainly, Barth is correct in seeing that the Old Testament as pointing to Jesus as the fulfilment  of God’s plan, however, is Barth’s ‘other worldliness’ always helpful in an understanding of the nature of God and Revelation?  Does Barth diminish too much the role of humanity in his wish to describe the centrality of God? Hpw does death and seperation become defined for Barth?
Hemblington - All Saints [Link]

© Godric Godricson
Barth  introduces biblical stories about ‘wonders’ as evidence of the smaller lights that lead to the larger light. We may perceive the image of a finger that consistently and irrevocably points towards Jesus in a specific historical epoch. The signs and symbols of Biblical events are merely that; signs and symbols, all of which point like a finger to the divinity of Jesus and the cosmic significance of Jesus. Barth goes into depth about the manner in which Jesus fulfils scriptural accounts about the Messiah. Using the metaphor of “lights”;  Barth expands the concept of ‘clues’ that are there laid out and to be found by the theologian, all of which point to God.
The concept of theological “wonderment” is one which implies a single minded focus on the study of God to the exclusion of all other areas and in some ways Barth advocates a single minded focus on God which is commendable but which may also restrict thought and development. 
An evaluation of Barth and “Wonderment”  should consider the thought of Barth himself who in “wonderment” emphasises the eternal and unapproachable ‘otherness’ of God and how God (as the eternal creator) mystically points to Himself through Jesus rather than through the experience of humanity.  In his work; Barth points to the centrality of the Word of God rather than the actions of humanity. At Cana; human beings are the extras, or perhaps the little lights, that point to the centrality of Jesus and the greater light  made evident there. 

Hemblington - All Saints [Link]

© Godric Godricson
Struggles within pre-war German theology  influnced Barth and we must generally question  the effects of German National Socialism on German religious observance and the challenges presented to Christianity of all persuasions and ‘confessions’ by Nazism. Similarly, translation from the German langauage  may have to inadvertent emphasis on certain aspects when compared and contrasted to a more ‘Anglo-Saxon’ approach to theology. 
Barth appears to contain a particular intensity that springs from the German experience and which may not be applicable to other experiences of Christianity. Barth may not have relevance to others ‘theologies’ and in any attempt to place tradition at the centre of faith he may also restrict thought and change. Tradition is hardly likely to be sympathetic to ‘liberation theology’, ‘feminist theology’, ‘black theology’ or even ‘Queer theology’.
In essence, Barth’s works fit into a German speaking post war epoch when german theologians tried to exorcise the ghosts of their own past. Some of the ideas presented by Barth are part of this intellectual and historical process. Equally, Barth’s views are perhaps focussed on an overly traditional ‘other worldliness’ that reduces the need to consider the human response to God and the natural world.

Dealings with the Dead - Cremation

Dealings with the Dead, Volume I (of 2)

Project Gutenburg
The board of sextons have met, and we have concluded not to recommend a revival of the ancient custom of burning the dead. It would be very troublesome to do it, out of town, and inconvenient in the city. I have always thought it wrong to bury in the city; and it would be much worse to burn there. The first law of the tenth table of the Romans is in these words—“Let no dead body be interred or burnt within the city.” Something may be got to help pay for a church, by selling tombs below. When a church was built here, some years ago, an eminent physician, one of the proprietors, was consulted and gave his sanction. Yet more than one of our board is very sure, that, on a warm, close Sunday, in the spring, he has snuffed up something that wasn’t particularly orthodox, in that church. The old Romans were very careful of the rights of their fellows, in this respect: the twelfth law of the tenth table runs thus—“Let no sepulchre be built, or funeral pile raised within sixty feet of any house, without the consent of the owner of that house.” They certainly conducted matters with great propriety, avoiding extravagance and intemperance, as appears by the seventh law of the same table—“Let no slaves be embalmed; let there be no drinking round a dead body; nor any perfumed liquors be poured upon it.” So also the second law—“Let all costliness and excessive waitings be banished from funerals.” The women were so very troublesome upon these occasions, that a special law, the fifth, was made for their government—“Let not the women tear their faces, or disfigure themselves, or make hideous outcries.”

Burial in the nave

Hemblington - All Saints [Link]

© Godric Godricson
It was not unusual for one person to have several funerals: to prevent this, however agreeable to the Roman undertakers, the tenth law of the tenth table was made—“Let no man have more than one funeral, or more than one bed put under him.” There was also a very strange practice during the first Decemvirate; the friends often abstracted a finger of the deceased, or some part of the body, and performed fresh obsequies, in some other place; erecting there a cenotaph or empty sepulchre, in which they fancied the ghost of the departed took occasional refuge, when wandering about—in case of a sudden shower, perhaps; or being caught out too near daylight.

For the correction of this folly, the Decemvirs passed the sixth law of the tenth table—“Let not any part of a dead body be carried away, in order to perform other obsequies for the deceased, unless he died in war, or out of his own country.” It was upon such occasions as these, in which an empty form was observed, and no actual inhumation took place, that the practice of throwing three handsful of earth originated. This usage was practised also by the Jews, and has come down to modern times. Baron Rothschild (Nathan Meyer) who died in Frankfort, July 28, 1836, was buried in the ground of the Synagogue, in Duke’s Place, London. His sons, Lionel, Anthony, Nathaniel, and Meyer, his brother-in-law, Mr. Montefiore, and his ancient friend, Mr. Samuels, at the age of ninety-six, commenced the service of filling up the grave,—by casting in, each one of them, three handsful of earth. Not satisfied with carrying a bottle of sal volatile to funerals, the women, and even the men, were in the habit of carrying pots of essences, which occasioned the enactment of the eighth law—“Let no crowns, festoons, perfuming pots, or any kind of perfume be carried to funerals.”


Here lieth the body
of William
the son of
Will and Mary
Heath
he died May the
14th 1746
Aged 19 years

Hemblington - All Saints [Link]

© Godric Godricson



Burning or interring was adopted, by the ancients, at the will of the relatives. This is manifest from the eleventh law, which prohibits the use of gold in all obsequies, with a single exception—“Let no gold be used in any obsequies, unless the jaw of the deceased has been tied up with a gold thread. In that case the corpse may be interred or burnt, with the gold thread.” A large quantity of silver is annually buried with the dead. It finds its way up again, however, in the course of time.

Common as burning was, among the ancients, it was looked upon, by some, with great abhorrence. The body to be burned was placed upon a pile—if the body of a person of quality, one or more slaves or captives were burned with it. When not forbidden, all sorts of precious ointments and perfumes were poured upon the corpse. The favorite dogs and horses of the defunct were cast upon the pile. Homer tells us, that four horses, two dogs, and twelve Trojan captives were burnt upon the pile, with the dead body of Patroclus. The corpses, that they might consume the sooner, were covered with the fat of beasts. Some near relative lighted the pile, uttering prayers to Boreas and Zephyrus to increase the flame.
In Memory of
Robert
the son of
Edw Heath
who died August 30
1763
In his infancy

Hemblington - All Saints [Link]

© Godric Godricson


© Godric Godricson
The relatives stood around, calling on the deceased, and pouring on libations of wine, with which they finally extinguished the flames, when the pile was well burnt down. They then collected the bones and ashes. How they were ever able to discriminate between men, dogs, and horses, it is hard to say. Probably the whole was sanctified, in their opinion, by juxtaposition. The bones might be distinguished, but not the dust. Such bones as could be identified, were washed and anointed by the nearest relatives. What an office! How custom changes the complexion of such matters! These relics were then placed in urns of wood, stone, earth, silver, or gold, according to the quality of the parties. Where are these memorials now! these myriads of urns! They were deposited in tombs—of which a very perfect account may be found in the description of the street of tombs, at Pompeii.