What do you think?
Rate this book
For All the Saints: Remembering the Christians Departed
"We have been drifting into a muddle and a mess, putting together bits and pieces of traditions, ideas and practices in the hope that they will make sense. They don't. There may be times when a typical Anglican fudge is a pleasant, chewy sort of thing, but this isn't one of them. It's time to think and speak clearly and act decisively." With these robust words Tom Wright, Bishop of Durham, throws down a challenge to current liturgy and practice surrounding All Saints' and All Souls' Days, and sets out to clarify our thinking about what happens to people after they die. Heaven, Hell, and Purgatory, what it means to pray for the dead, what (and who) are the saints, are all addressed in this invigorating and rigorously argued book.
96 pages, Paperback
First published August 1, 2003
About the author
N.T. Wright
382 books3,017 followersN. T. Wright is the former Bishop of Durham in the Church of England (2003-2010) and one of the world's leading Bible scholars. He is now serving as the chair of New Testament and Early Christianity at the School of Divinity at the University of St. Andrews. He has been featured on ABC News, Dateline NBC, The Colbert Report, and Fresh Air, and he has taught New Testament studies at Cambridge, McGill, and Oxford universities. Wright is the award-winning author of Surprised by Hope, Simply Christian, The Last Word, The Challenge of Jesus, The Meaning of Jesus (coauthored with Marcus Borg), as well as the much heralded series Christian Origins and the Question of God.
He also publishes under Tom Wright.
He also publishes under Tom Wright.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 49 reviews
October 1, 2022
A useful thoughtful book about what the Bible does and doesn't say about the Christian dead. Exposes the muddle most of our ideas are in. Wright's clarity and willingness to take aim at people all over the liberal-conservative spectrum for bad and unthoughtful use of scripture is admirable.
Here's a good quote:
I stress again ... that it is not up to us to say who's in and who's out [of Heaven]. There is such a thing as a fundamentalist arrogance that declares that its own type of Christian is the real thing, and that all others are a sham and heading for hell. But it is equally arrogant-- almost equally fundamentalist, in its own way! -- to insist that, because we must indeed be reticent at this point, we can cheerfully assume that everyone must be 'in' and that the warnings of scripture and tradition can be quietly set aside.
Theological humility for all! And to all a good clean fight!
Here's a good quote:
I stress again ... that it is not up to us to say who's in and who's out [of Heaven]. There is such a thing as a fundamentalist arrogance that declares that its own type of Christian is the real thing, and that all others are a sham and heading for hell. But it is equally arrogant-- almost equally fundamentalist, in its own way! -- to insist that, because we must indeed be reticent at this point, we can cheerfully assume that everyone must be 'in' and that the warnings of scripture and tradition can be quietly set aside.
Theological humility for all! And to all a good clean fight!
March 13, 2013
I didn't realize going into this book that it was Wright's response to a trend he was seeing in the Anglican church to bring back purgatory and traditional All Souls' observances. To that extent, it is a good contribution to that subject but not eye-opening for me. He also has a deep problem with the concept of "Christ the King" Sunday; but I have never viewed it the way he portrays it as being presented. I concede that my ignorance is probably to blame for that, but I've only and always viewed Christ the King day not as a day when the Church says "Christ took his throne in Heaven at his ascension but NOW he's taking his throne on earth". That would certainly be ridiculous. He is the King of heaven AND earth, beginning at his ascension. What I personally have seen Christ the King day presenting is simply the symbolism of the coming future day when the whole world, believers and unbelievers alike, would together acknowledge that Christ is King of all. Believers already acknowledge that fact; someday Christ will return to make his reign known to those who do not yet acknowledge it--and that is something to look forward to and celebrate. And I don't feel that detracts from Advent's twofold "waiting", as Christ the King day symbolizes the future fulfillment, then Advent comes in and reminds us "But we're still waiting." To me, that is both a full circle and a continuing going forth into the future. So, probably if a person views the purpose of Christ the King day the way Wright claims people are using it, it needs to be addressed. But for me I feel it's quite consistent with the current church year.
I agree that the various tradions that have sprung up surrounding All Saints' Day are not necessary. However, there are lots of things within the church year that are not necessary but which are quite beneficial. Can a Christian BE a Christian without Advent? Or Lent? Yes. But I also know that their experience will grow much richer if they observe them. Also, it's usually easier to change someone's understanding of something if you replace it with something better, rather than just eliminate it. And so I would argue that rather than just eliminating All Souls' Day due to the traditional purposes for which it has been used, that we reenvision it.
For me and my family, this has taken the following form (I'm numbering them the way I have on purpose):
2. We observe All Saints' Day. We focus on the fact that God's people are to reflect the Light of Christ in our lives, and that this is only possible due to God's grace. We talk a lot about how all believers are saints--very similar to Wright's discussion. We also learn about the saintly "cloud of witnesses" from scripture and church history so we can learn from their examples how to live holy lives and acknowledge their shortcomings, praising the fact that if God can use people like them, then He can use people like us, too (again, going back to God's grace).
3. On All Souls' Day we observe that God's people are to share the Light of Christ with those who are still walking in darkness (those not included in the designation 'Saints') through our loving witness, both in word and deed; and that since we have no need to fear death, we can witness without fear.
1. We observe All Hallows' (Saints') Eve as a time to bring the themes of Christmas and Easter to their culmination, that Christ is the Light of the World who has overcome death, sin, and evil (the themes of the book of Revelation are quite appropriate in this regard and fit nicely with the "end" of the church year). This is why we can witness without fear.
Now, I'd like to think Wright would allow that reenvisioning All Souls' Day in such a way would be useful, at the least. I assume that he would argue that adding an All Hallows' Eve observance to the mix would be too much, and in many ways he may be correct. Afterall, we talk about these themes of sin, death and evil at Easter. I would suggest though, that Easter focuses more on Christ's conquering and overcoming, whereas All Hallows' can focus more on the history and reality of how that overcoming works itself out in the lives of Christ's people. For me, it has been more beneficial than I could have imagined.
Re. Wright's discussion about All Souls' Day, he is correct in criticizing the typical purposes and practices for it. But I think reenforcing the distinction about who the term 'Saints' includes (as he rightfully has) requires that we then address a proper way to approach talking about those who are not included in the term 'Saints'. We already know they die, too. And as he points out, they do not enter into Christ's presence when they die like the saints do, to await Christ's return in a conscious state. We don't need a whole day to address that. What we do need is a day to remind the Church the importance of witnessessing to them and how to do so. Because witnessing is just what a Saint is called to do. All Saints' Day is about who the Saints are and what we can learn from other Saints' lives. All Souls' Day is about what the Saints do and learning to do like others have done.
Re. All Hallows' Eve, it is an inevitable cultural celebration where I live and since it gets its name from All Saints' Day, it seems logical to address it. I was forced to reevaluate Halloween when I, having been brought up to believe it was evil and 'satan's birthday' and sinful for Christians to celebrate, married a Christian who saw it merely as a day to dress up and get candy. We planned to have kids, so this became an issue. Wanting to give all things to God, I decided to start praying about it and looking into it. That's when I became aware of All Saints' Day, and that is when all the themes came together for me. [If anyone is interested in my conclusions regarding the "pagan origins", feel free to ask.] A major reason given for not celebrating Halloween as we see it observed it to avoid celebrating evil or the appearance of evil. Many conclude that they cannot celebrate halloween due to the themes of witches, devils, ghosts, etc., I have come to the opposite conclusion. Indeed, I agree that the ways most cultures, including our own, typically celebrate this holiday do in fact openly promote death, devils, witches and flagrant "appearances of evil" (1 Thess. 5:22). But ironically, it is these very cultural celebrations that help point me to the importance of this holy-day (it's only as holy as Christmas Eve is). The world sees death and evil as realities and it not only addresses them, but it embraces them one day a year in an attempt to lessen its fear of them. As a Believer, it is not appropriate to hide my eyes and shield my mind from this. Instead, I have chosen to ask "What does Scripture teach us about death and evil?" "What does Christ's Kingdom have to offer to the world in relation to death and evil?" And, "Is this something to celebrate?" I think most Christians, when looking at the answers to those first two questions, would say 'yes' to the third.
Regarding the cultural symbols of Halloween, my family uses them to enhance these themes. Decorations include a reaper in a cage ('O Death, where is your victory? O Death, where is your sting?'), skulls and skeletons ('for the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life….'), a graveyard with tombstones for "Death", "Sin" and "Evil" (evil/satan is represented by a dragon, as in revelation); candles and light to represent Christ's Light in the darkness; jack o'lanterns to represent the light of Christ shining through us. I prayed about this issue for 4 years before developing the holiday that I have for my family, and through it all God kept speaking His truth to me about these themes. I think to the extent that a Christian or the Church wishes to engage the world around us through All Saints' Day, perhaps this is a good way to get that foot in the door.
The three days together have become for me one of the most spiritually rewarding times of the year after Easter and Christmas. I even created liturgies for our family to use to worship together on each of the three days, based on Robert E. Webber's "The Book of Family Prayer" format (complete with prayers, hymns, scripture, and responsive readings. If anyone would be interested in seeing what I've put together, I would be happy to share those, too). We listen to Christian "Halloween" music (Playdough's "Cash Rules Everything" and Citizen's "I'm Living In A Land of Death" are my newest favorites, but also songs like Selah's "Ain't No Grave" and "All My Sins (Be Washed Away)". I have a huge list.)
And these observances have been particularly helpful to me in dealing with death. The Church doesn't talk about death except at Easter and at funerals. I think it's important to talk about it in a Christian way at other times of the year, separated from the celebration of the Firstborn from the Dead and from current grief. Doing so with my children, too, helped my then-6-year-old daughter when my father passed away. She already knew the proper way to think about what had happened.
Despite all these critiques (as if I am qualified to critique Wright), there was still much in this little booklet that I found useful and just might revise my Halloween liturgy slightly to add some additional thoughts from this. It is a great addition to my library.
I agree that the various tradions that have sprung up surrounding All Saints' Day are not necessary. However, there are lots of things within the church year that are not necessary but which are quite beneficial. Can a Christian BE a Christian without Advent? Or Lent? Yes. But I also know that their experience will grow much richer if they observe them. Also, it's usually easier to change someone's understanding of something if you replace it with something better, rather than just eliminate it. And so I would argue that rather than just eliminating All Souls' Day due to the traditional purposes for which it has been used, that we reenvision it.
For me and my family, this has taken the following form (I'm numbering them the way I have on purpose):
2. We observe All Saints' Day. We focus on the fact that God's people are to reflect the Light of Christ in our lives, and that this is only possible due to God's grace. We talk a lot about how all believers are saints--very similar to Wright's discussion. We also learn about the saintly "cloud of witnesses" from scripture and church history so we can learn from their examples how to live holy lives and acknowledge their shortcomings, praising the fact that if God can use people like them, then He can use people like us, too (again, going back to God's grace).
3. On All Souls' Day we observe that God's people are to share the Light of Christ with those who are still walking in darkness (those not included in the designation 'Saints') through our loving witness, both in word and deed; and that since we have no need to fear death, we can witness without fear.
1. We observe All Hallows' (Saints') Eve as a time to bring the themes of Christmas and Easter to their culmination, that Christ is the Light of the World who has overcome death, sin, and evil (the themes of the book of Revelation are quite appropriate in this regard and fit nicely with the "end" of the church year). This is why we can witness without fear.
Now, I'd like to think Wright would allow that reenvisioning All Souls' Day in such a way would be useful, at the least. I assume that he would argue that adding an All Hallows' Eve observance to the mix would be too much, and in many ways he may be correct. Afterall, we talk about these themes of sin, death and evil at Easter. I would suggest though, that Easter focuses more on Christ's conquering and overcoming, whereas All Hallows' can focus more on the history and reality of how that overcoming works itself out in the lives of Christ's people. For me, it has been more beneficial than I could have imagined.
Re. Wright's discussion about All Souls' Day, he is correct in criticizing the typical purposes and practices for it. But I think reenforcing the distinction about who the term 'Saints' includes (as he rightfully has) requires that we then address a proper way to approach talking about those who are not included in the term 'Saints'. We already know they die, too. And as he points out, they do not enter into Christ's presence when they die like the saints do, to await Christ's return in a conscious state. We don't need a whole day to address that. What we do need is a day to remind the Church the importance of witnessessing to them and how to do so. Because witnessing is just what a Saint is called to do. All Saints' Day is about who the Saints are and what we can learn from other Saints' lives. All Souls' Day is about what the Saints do and learning to do like others have done.
Re. All Hallows' Eve, it is an inevitable cultural celebration where I live and since it gets its name from All Saints' Day, it seems logical to address it. I was forced to reevaluate Halloween when I, having been brought up to believe it was evil and 'satan's birthday' and sinful for Christians to celebrate, married a Christian who saw it merely as a day to dress up and get candy. We planned to have kids, so this became an issue. Wanting to give all things to God, I decided to start praying about it and looking into it. That's when I became aware of All Saints' Day, and that is when all the themes came together for me. [If anyone is interested in my conclusions regarding the "pagan origins", feel free to ask.] A major reason given for not celebrating Halloween as we see it observed it to avoid celebrating evil or the appearance of evil. Many conclude that they cannot celebrate halloween due to the themes of witches, devils, ghosts, etc., I have come to the opposite conclusion. Indeed, I agree that the ways most cultures, including our own, typically celebrate this holiday do in fact openly promote death, devils, witches and flagrant "appearances of evil" (1 Thess. 5:22). But ironically, it is these very cultural celebrations that help point me to the importance of this holy-day (it's only as holy as Christmas Eve is). The world sees death and evil as realities and it not only addresses them, but it embraces them one day a year in an attempt to lessen its fear of them. As a Believer, it is not appropriate to hide my eyes and shield my mind from this. Instead, I have chosen to ask "What does Scripture teach us about death and evil?" "What does Christ's Kingdom have to offer to the world in relation to death and evil?" And, "Is this something to celebrate?" I think most Christians, when looking at the answers to those first two questions, would say 'yes' to the third.
Regarding the cultural symbols of Halloween, my family uses them to enhance these themes. Decorations include a reaper in a cage ('O Death, where is your victory? O Death, where is your sting?'), skulls and skeletons ('for the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life….'), a graveyard with tombstones for "Death", "Sin" and "Evil" (evil/satan is represented by a dragon, as in revelation); candles and light to represent Christ's Light in the darkness; jack o'lanterns to represent the light of Christ shining through us. I prayed about this issue for 4 years before developing the holiday that I have for my family, and through it all God kept speaking His truth to me about these themes. I think to the extent that a Christian or the Church wishes to engage the world around us through All Saints' Day, perhaps this is a good way to get that foot in the door.
The three days together have become for me one of the most spiritually rewarding times of the year after Easter and Christmas. I even created liturgies for our family to use to worship together on each of the three days, based on Robert E. Webber's "The Book of Family Prayer" format (complete with prayers, hymns, scripture, and responsive readings. If anyone would be interested in seeing what I've put together, I would be happy to share those, too). We listen to Christian "Halloween" music (Playdough's "Cash Rules Everything" and Citizen's "I'm Living In A Land of Death" are my newest favorites, but also songs like Selah's "Ain't No Grave" and "All My Sins (Be Washed Away)". I have a huge list.)
And these observances have been particularly helpful to me in dealing with death. The Church doesn't talk about death except at Easter and at funerals. I think it's important to talk about it in a Christian way at other times of the year, separated from the celebration of the Firstborn from the Dead and from current grief. Doing so with my children, too, helped my then-6-year-old daughter when my father passed away. She already knew the proper way to think about what had happened.
Despite all these critiques (as if I am qualified to critique Wright), there was still much in this little booklet that I found useful and just might revise my Halloween liturgy slightly to add some additional thoughts from this. It is a great addition to my library.
November 3, 2012
Great reasoned little tract on the theological implications of All Saints and All Souls days. I've read it twice and loved it both times. Especially important is Wright's cleaning up of muddy waters surrounding the issue/practice of the 2 feast days and his clear Biblical insight. However, while I love his bright and tight reasoning, I don't want to completely throw the baby out with the bath water and wish he would make space for or at least ask questions around how the two feast days can be re-imagined in the practice of the church. I have my own thoughts and convictions about that which I will keep to myself for now. I really did like his criticism of the pre-Advent "kingdom" season and have always appreciated Advent as a season with multiple meanings, that of looking back to the first Advent while simultaneously longing for the second Advent. I give the book 3 stars only because I really wish he'd asked more questions and because the subject matter is slightly niche (albeit a niche I am firmly planted in,)
January 20, 2014
This is a short book by an excellent biblical scholar on the state of the departed. N.T. Wright explains that the faithful departed reside in a temporary resting place, being refreshed (a la the thief on the cross). In the same way, Wright dismantles the doctrine of purgatory, noting that Orthodoxy never held to such a belief and that modern Catholic theologians, including Pope Emeritus Benedict have drastically reshaped the concept of Purgatory. Wright does affirm prayers FOR and WITH the dead. Only about one half of the book is dedicated to discussing the deceased; the other half features Wright's discussion of the Christian year and criticism of reordering traditional celebrations, especially the Feast of Christ the King which Wright rebukes as disorienting. Were I to follow the Christian calendar more closely this half would have been more relevant. Wright is rigorously sharp, hence his criticism of what he sees as misguided (if well-intentioned) innovations and his remarks about classic hymns that actually declare theological error.
November 1, 2014
Read this a few years ago, but thought I'd treat myself to it again for our current Allsaintstide.
December 3, 2018
N.T. Wright's brief look at the traditional practices of All Saints Day and All Souls Day in the modern, Protestant high church. Are these holy days worth keeping? Do they align with biblical truth? Or are they being imported from Catholic tradition? Wright clearly explains that All Saints Day in the original Catholic tradition unnecessarily restricts sainthood to those canonized individuals when the Bible claims all Christians to be made saints by the justification in Jesus. He also clarifies that All Souls Day in the original Catholic tradition is built on the extrabiblical doctrine of Purgatory and the need to pray for deceased loved ones to reach heaven, again defying the doctrine of justification in Jesus. Therefore, Wright urges the practice of All Saints Day to be kept for all believers in Christ who have died and dismisses All Souls Day entirely as unnecessary at best and confusing at worst.
November 2, 2025
This was a very different book than I thought it was going to be from the title and description.
It was basically NT Wright arguing with the Powers That Be in the Anglican Church (of which I am not a part) about the celebration of All Saints vs. All Souls and his liturgical dislike of Christ the King Sunday. He convinced me on the first point—that Protestants should celebrate All Saints but not all Souls (though I’ve never been a part of a Protestant church that celebrated the two separately) but not the second (I like Christ the King Sunday and its place in the liturgical calendar).
The funniest part about this book is it was written in 2004, so it refers to one Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger as if not many people would know who that is. 😆 (And he is correct, I am not Catholic, and would not have known at the time, but we all learned who he was when he became Pope Benedict XVI in 2005!)
It was basically NT Wright arguing with the Powers That Be in the Anglican Church (of which I am not a part) about the celebration of All Saints vs. All Souls and his liturgical dislike of Christ the King Sunday. He convinced me on the first point—that Protestants should celebrate All Saints but not all Souls (though I’ve never been a part of a Protestant church that celebrated the two separately) but not the second (I like Christ the King Sunday and its place in the liturgical calendar).
The funniest part about this book is it was written in 2004, so it refers to one Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger as if not many people would know who that is. 😆 (And he is correct, I am not Catholic, and would not have known at the time, but we all learned who he was when he became Pope Benedict XVI in 2005!)
January 3, 2019
One area which has always interested me as a Christian person are the wildly different views that different Christian and nearly/non-Christian folk and organisations have regarding what happens when we die. I recently rediscovered and read Tom Wright’s little book For All the Saints: Remembering the Christian departed, which deals (from a biblically informed, historically aware and pastorally sensitive Anglican perspective) with some of the key questions.
https://www.thomascreedy.co.uk/book-r...
https://www.thomascreedy.co.uk/book-r...
October 9, 2026
A short book about what happens to Christians after death. Well thought out for the most part. Wright explains why we don’t believe in Purgatory and why we should celebrate All Saints but not particularly All Souls. Near the end, he also explains the value of the Christian liturgical calendar and argues that the recent addition of the Feast of Christ the King may be ill-advised. My only real disappointment is that, while he also shoots down some alternatives, he never offers a better solution. Wright seems to dislike every suggestion for what the church should do in November.
September 26, 2021
I love Tom's views on most things and he doesn't disappoint here. It must be remembered that this is essentially extended notes for an actual book but it does give us good insight into the difficult question of what happens to our beloved departed after death. Toward the end Tom explores his own thoughts around liturgical holidays which feels like a sidetrack to me, but I still enjoyed it because it shows Tom's thought process and reminds us that the two topics are interrelated.
November 10, 2024
I’ve become interested in the Day of the Dead recently, as it’s been introduced to me and as my desire has increased for my kids to know more about their grandma. Then I learned that many Christian calendars have an All Saints’ Day on November 1 and an All Souls’ Day on November 2, so I picked up this book to learn more about those related holidays.
I now plan on celebrating both All Saints’ Day and the Day of the Dead with my family in the future, but we’ll leave All Souls’ Day out of it.
I now plan on celebrating both All Saints’ Day and the Day of the Dead with my family in the future, but we’ll leave All Souls’ Day out of it.
October 23, 2022
A bit of a mess - Wright seems to believe that praying for the dead insults the resurrection and the ascension, then backtracks in the conclusion without ever connecting this to the rest of the book. He presents a medieval version of purgatory as the only reason to pray for the dead although he seems to realize this isn't true.
August 27, 2018
Brilliant and Clear
N.T. Wright offers a clear and simple book that helps clear up some of the grey on Christian thought concerning death and the afterlife. An excellent and insightful read.
N.T. Wright offers a clear and simple book that helps clear up some of the grey on Christian thought concerning death and the afterlife. An excellent and insightful read.
November 28, 2021
Helpful thoughts on the church calendar - its constituent days and reasons for observing, the ultimate goal of Christian bodies, what "heaven" is, where and when the kingdom is, and why purgatory does not have a biblical basis.
June 6, 2019
One of Wright's lighter books.
December 23, 2019
A brief but excellent discussion of the theological issues around All Souls' Day.
October 24, 2020
Highly recommend
December 7, 2021
Not the best NT Wright book I have ever read. Probably because it is placed entirely in an Anglican setting and deals with doctrines I do not recognise either in scripture or in practice.
May 3, 2022
Wright is mostly settling someone else's score with this book. Even so, I pulled a few thing from it. I like NT Wright's style.
June 1, 2023
3.5 stars
May 18, 2024
Good summary of why we are all saints and what the Bible says about what happens when we die.
February 6, 2025
Great accompaniment to the Jennifer Rothschild study on Heaven
July 16, 2025
Finished the Logos version. Great book! Answered the questions I had.
March 7, 2026
A lot of the short booklet was used in his larger work “Surprised by Hope” but there was a bit of new material which I appreciated.
October 12, 2026
short and sweet
Solid case for biblical eschatology regarding our hope when we die. It is far better to depart and be with Christ. Purgatory is not far better. Purgatory is a farce.
Solid case for biblical eschatology regarding our hope when we die. It is far better to depart and be with Christ. Purgatory is not far better. Purgatory is a farce.
January 12, 2022
I really appreciated Wright respect and candor on this topic. If you are curious about topics like praying to the dead, purgatory, Christian calendar celebrations, this book can be a good resource. Being probably the shortest of Wright's books I have read, he condenses his view quite well. No he doesn't endorse purgatory nor petitioning saints to talk to Jesus for us in case you are wondering, but he does explore the background of why those who do.
April 7, 2008
This was a great book, almost a tract or essay about how to view the deceased. This is an issue I have as I'm constantly weighing how Protestantism relates to church tradition, especially traditions that have been in the church from the first four centuries or so.
Basically, Wright gets his viewpoints from his precise and contextually rich exegesis of certain passages. He is a reformer par excellence in the sola scriptura and semper reformanda tradition. No sacred cows for Tom.
His ideas serve as a corrective for an overly-dualistic Christianity which seeks to place hope in a disembodied "heaven" which has no connection to God's creation. This idea runs through much, if not all of his work, e.g. that God's kingdom has broken in to space-time through Jesus incarnation, cross, and resurrection, and that the hope we have is of his eventual resurrection of all creation being made new. Thus, Revelation as it talks about a new Jerusalem coming down from heaven, and a new heaven and new earth, is actually an answer to the archetypal Lord's Prayer, namely, "your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven." Even the second coming falls into this paradigm. It is not that Jesus will take us to some other place; rather, he's going to come back as the rightful king and lord of creation as we meet him in the sky as his welcoming party.
As far as saints, Wright states very emphatically that all who belong to Christ are saints, and that purgatory is unbiblical, unhelpful, and illogical. I liked how he didn't disparage Catholic teaching, quoting from luminaries like Rahner and Ratzinger (Pope Benedict) their views of purgatory falling more in line with a biblical and orthodox understanding.
I liked what Wright said about praying for the deceased. It got to the heart of the purpose of prayer. Prayer is our laying our hearts bare before God, lifting up our loved ones and our cares and concerns. Thus, out of love, we ought to talk to God about those who have deceased. It doesn't mean we're trying to give them a special lift from Purgatory, but we are giving them to God. I think Protestants need a vocabulary for speaking of the deceased in a way that is more than simply closing the book on our interactions with God on behalf of them.
The one weakness that I have with this book's thesis is something that I see as a weakness in Wright's otherwise amazingly scholarly work. Wright is extremely good at pointing out historical and exegetical viewpoints on scripture, but I'd like to see him interact more with historical Church tradition although he does dialogue with contemporary theologians quite well. A personal issue is that I think many theologians put such a high value on scriptural exegesis that they diminish traditional church teaching and interpretation. It's like they're reading things for the first time all over again. I believe in sola scriptura, but not in a John MacArthur or Howard Hendricks way. It's not "Bible alone". It's the Bible correctly interpreted through tradition, which includes historical-linguistic exegetical tools, but it puts them in their proper perspective. I'm moving towards a more Vincent of Lerins-style interpretation that takes into account "what has been believed everywhere, always, and by all". Not just what we think the Bible says based on our tools of modern academic precision.
Basically, Wright gets his viewpoints from his precise and contextually rich exegesis of certain passages. He is a reformer par excellence in the sola scriptura and semper reformanda tradition. No sacred cows for Tom.
His ideas serve as a corrective for an overly-dualistic Christianity which seeks to place hope in a disembodied "heaven" which has no connection to God's creation. This idea runs through much, if not all of his work, e.g. that God's kingdom has broken in to space-time through Jesus incarnation, cross, and resurrection, and that the hope we have is of his eventual resurrection of all creation being made new. Thus, Revelation as it talks about a new Jerusalem coming down from heaven, and a new heaven and new earth, is actually an answer to the archetypal Lord's Prayer, namely, "your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven." Even the second coming falls into this paradigm. It is not that Jesus will take us to some other place; rather, he's going to come back as the rightful king and lord of creation as we meet him in the sky as his welcoming party.
As far as saints, Wright states very emphatically that all who belong to Christ are saints, and that purgatory is unbiblical, unhelpful, and illogical. I liked how he didn't disparage Catholic teaching, quoting from luminaries like Rahner and Ratzinger (Pope Benedict) their views of purgatory falling more in line with a biblical and orthodox understanding.
I liked what Wright said about praying for the deceased. It got to the heart of the purpose of prayer. Prayer is our laying our hearts bare before God, lifting up our loved ones and our cares and concerns. Thus, out of love, we ought to talk to God about those who have deceased. It doesn't mean we're trying to give them a special lift from Purgatory, but we are giving them to God. I think Protestants need a vocabulary for speaking of the deceased in a way that is more than simply closing the book on our interactions with God on behalf of them.
The one weakness that I have with this book's thesis is something that I see as a weakness in Wright's otherwise amazingly scholarly work. Wright is extremely good at pointing out historical and exegetical viewpoints on scripture, but I'd like to see him interact more with historical Church tradition although he does dialogue with contemporary theologians quite well. A personal issue is that I think many theologians put such a high value on scriptural exegesis that they diminish traditional church teaching and interpretation. It's like they're reading things for the first time all over again. I believe in sola scriptura, but not in a John MacArthur or Howard Hendricks way. It's not "Bible alone". It's the Bible correctly interpreted through tradition, which includes historical-linguistic exegetical tools, but it puts them in their proper perspective. I'm moving towards a more Vincent of Lerins-style interpretation that takes into account "what has been believed everywhere, always, and by all". Not just what we think the Bible says based on our tools of modern academic precision.
April 18, 2016
This slim volume originates from a conversation that Father Wright (He is Anglican and serves in England) had with a grieving widow. She received a number of consoling messages from kindhearted religious folk. But, she noted that what they said seemed to conflict. What really happens when a Christian dies?
Wright turned to the Scriptures to offer the answers that are available to us. When we die, we experience what Wright calls a “discontinuity” with our body. We enter paradise, a resting place. Jesus promised this to the thief on the cross. Paul experienced this paradise during an intense time of prayer. Paradise is an experience with Christ. The Apostle Paul calls this “sleeping in Christ” (the NRSV translates this word as “died”) in 1 Corinthians 7:39; 11:30; 15:6, 18, 20, 51; and 1 Thessalonians 4:13-15. Revelation 6:9-11 describes how the souls of the martyrs are waiting under the Altar for the completion of their redemption. Those who have fallen asleep are resting in Christ and are waiting for the Great Resurrection like all the rest of us.
Paradise is not the final destination. The final destination occurs at the Great Resurrection when Jesus comes again. In the Great Resurrection, all Christians will be resurrected. We will be transformed into the glorious new body God gives to us. Our resurrection will bear a striking resemblance to Jesus’ resurrection. Philippians 3:20-21 and 1 Corinthians 15:50-57 speak to the transformation that will occur. In Revelation 21, we are given the promise of the new heaven and the new earth. Revelation 21 is describing the existence of the faithful after the Great Resurrection.
Wright’s book offers a thoughtful, scriptural approach to questions about what happens to Christians after death. He observes that the scriptures do not answer all of our questions, but God’s Word does assure believers that they are not forgotten. Believers remain in God’s care. In other parts of the book Wright allows the witness of Scripture to critique the message of Christian hymns, recent theological and liturgical innovations, and other faith traditions.
Wright turned to the Scriptures to offer the answers that are available to us. When we die, we experience what Wright calls a “discontinuity” with our body. We enter paradise, a resting place. Jesus promised this to the thief on the cross. Paul experienced this paradise during an intense time of prayer. Paradise is an experience with Christ. The Apostle Paul calls this “sleeping in Christ” (the NRSV translates this word as “died”) in 1 Corinthians 7:39; 11:30; 15:6, 18, 20, 51; and 1 Thessalonians 4:13-15. Revelation 6:9-11 describes how the souls of the martyrs are waiting under the Altar for the completion of their redemption. Those who have fallen asleep are resting in Christ and are waiting for the Great Resurrection like all the rest of us.
Paradise is not the final destination. The final destination occurs at the Great Resurrection when Jesus comes again. In the Great Resurrection, all Christians will be resurrected. We will be transformed into the glorious new body God gives to us. Our resurrection will bear a striking resemblance to Jesus’ resurrection. Philippians 3:20-21 and 1 Corinthians 15:50-57 speak to the transformation that will occur. In Revelation 21, we are given the promise of the new heaven and the new earth. Revelation 21 is describing the existence of the faithful after the Great Resurrection.
Wright’s book offers a thoughtful, scriptural approach to questions about what happens to Christians after death. He observes that the scriptures do not answer all of our questions, but God’s Word does assure believers that they are not forgotten. Believers remain in God’s care. In other parts of the book Wright allows the witness of Scripture to critique the message of Christian hymns, recent theological and liturgical innovations, and other faith traditions.
October 28, 2013
An interesting short book. I happened to stumble on this while trying out Oyster (a sort of Netflix for books). It will have more impact and meaning if you are a practicing Anglican; particularly in Europe but there are some insights into how we approach issues surrounding the afterlife, the church calendar and liturgy. Wright's more academic work goes into far greater detail and his larger popular works more completely address these issues. As a result this book is best seen as a kind of teaser for books like Surprised by Hope and The Challenge of Jesus (and then Simply Jesus).
But Wright was attempting to address a movement within Anglicanism at the time that seemed to be rearranging the liturgy and the church calendar for popular reasons but in ways that muddied their theological utility. This is a part of Wright's larger work of pushing back on un-bibical but popular conceptions. We have become disconnected from the biblical understanding of the Kingdom of God, the resurrection and other eschatological issues. Wright argues for conditional mortality and for an intermediate state after death prior to a general resurection that leads to judgement and then to a new heaven and a new earth.
A useful discussion in truncated form but those looking for more will want to seek out other books.
But Wright was attempting to address a movement within Anglicanism at the time that seemed to be rearranging the liturgy and the church calendar for popular reasons but in ways that muddied their theological utility. This is a part of Wright's larger work of pushing back on un-bibical but popular conceptions. We have become disconnected from the biblical understanding of the Kingdom of God, the resurrection and other eschatological issues. Wright argues for conditional mortality and for an intermediate state after death prior to a general resurection that leads to judgement and then to a new heaven and a new earth.
A useful discussion in truncated form but those looking for more will want to seek out other books.
July 25, 2010
Weighing in at only 76 pages, this is a quick read. The subject of this book is twofold: First, what happens to Christians when they die? Second, what about the modern liturgies of All Saints' Day and All Souls' Day?
N.T. Wright clearly argues that our final destination is not "heaven", bur rather, resurrection in the context of the new heavens and new earth. Wright dismantles traditional and modern misunderstandings on the issue, and argues that Christians who die today will be in "paradise", or "heaven" (a place that St. Paul spoke highly of, a place with Jesus, where the faithful will await their final resurrection). My favorite part in the book was when he traced the historical development of purgatory. Consequently, the modern liturgy of All Saints' and All Souls' Days rests on deeply flawed principles. I've never seen N.T. Wright speak so strongly as he did here: "I regard these arguments as based on thin air, advancing by illegitimate steps, and reaching unwarranted conclusions."(pg 48)
I only gave this book 4 stars because I don't believe the issue of All Souls' Day is of immediate relevance to most of the people I know.
N.T. Wright clearly argues that our final destination is not "heaven", bur rather, resurrection in the context of the new heavens and new earth. Wright dismantles traditional and modern misunderstandings on the issue, and argues that Christians who die today will be in "paradise", or "heaven" (a place that St. Paul spoke highly of, a place with Jesus, where the faithful will await their final resurrection). My favorite part in the book was when he traced the historical development of purgatory. Consequently, the modern liturgy of All Saints' and All Souls' Days rests on deeply flawed principles. I've never seen N.T. Wright speak so strongly as he did here: "I regard these arguments as based on thin air, advancing by illegitimate steps, and reaching unwarranted conclusions."(pg 48)
I only gave this book 4 stars because I don't believe the issue of All Souls' Day is of immediate relevance to most of the people I know.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 49 reviews