How did the practice of praying for the dead in the catholic church come about?

Sis. This is a good site to learn of this origin.

http://home.computer.net/~cya/cy00026.html

Blessings.

First, you've confused praying "to" the dead with praying "for" the dead.

Praying "for" the dead comes from the book of 2 Maccabees 41-45: 41: All men therefore praising the Lord, the righteous Judge, who had opened the things that were hid,

42: Betook themselves unto prayer, and besought him that the sin committed might wholly be put out of remembrance. Besides, that noble Judas exhorted the people to keep themselves from sin, forsomuch as they saw before their eyes the things that came to pass for the sins of those that were slain.

43: And when he had made a gathering throughout the company to the sum of two thousand drachms of silver, he sent it to Jerusalem to offer a sin offering, doing therein very well and honestly, in that he was mindful of the resurrection:

44: For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should have risen again, it had been superfluous and vain to pray for the dead.

45: And also in that he perceived that there was great favour laid up for those that died godly, it was an holy and good thought. Whereupon he made a reconciliation for the dead, that they might be delivered from sin.

Prayers "to" the dead are given as supplication - asking for aid from the "cloud of witnesses" referred to by Paul.

This belief stems from the teaching that we who are saved by the Grace of Jesus Christ are always in "communion" with God's Saints, and hence they can hear our requests and aid them.

This is NOT the same as "contacting spirits" through "divination" or "necromancy," where-in the dead are contacted and actually expected to communicate back.

This was one of the divisive factors that caused Martin Luther to challenge the practice of selling indulgences. The contention was, and still is that it was a money maker for the church. Why do members of the RCC only refer to RCC sites, sanctioned by the same, instead of giving a resource that is historically impartial. A good Protestant church will encourage the reading of scripture for such answers. The RCC members must seek the interpretation of a priest. Why do many Catholics think the practice of astrology is a harmless practice for Christians, when that is also forbidden in scripture? I would appreciate a reference site that was not sponsored by the RCC. Perhaps, if instead of defending man's dogma and traditions, we could all come closer to common ground as Christ intended His Church to be. If anyone cares to look up Pope Pious XII on a history site, rather than a RCC site, I think they would reevaluate the "unbroken line from Peter," doctrine.

Who said anything about contacting spirits? The Catholic Church encourages people to pray for the dead, not to communicate with the dead.

If you love someone, and the person you love dies, why wouldn't you pray for him? Why wouldn't you turn to God in your hour of sorrow and ask Him to take care of your loved one? How could God disapprove of a sincere, humble prayer arising from a sorrowful heart?

EDIT: Let me add a couple of thoughts: In Matthew 12:32, Jesus speaks of the sinner for whom there is no forgiveness "in this world or in the world to come". 1 Corinthians 3:15 speaks of Judgment Day, on which some men "will be saved, though only as men are saved by passing through fire". (Chez_Deville has quoted the entire passage above.) These texts may not be positive proofs of the Catholic Church's teachings on Purgatory, but certainly they are compatible with such teachings. If there is a temporary purification (as Veritatum explained so well) after death, then wouldn't it make sense for us to pray for those who are undergoing the purification?

It actually is in Scripture, dear, but in one of the books that Martin Luther jettisoned -- 2 Maccabees. Please note that it was in the canon of Scripture until that point, so the Catholic Church didn't "add" it, it's still there as far as we are concerned. The "reformers" tossed it to the curb along with the other Deuterocanonical books.

The exact quote from 2 Maccabees 12:43-46 (NAB) is:

"He then took up a collection among all his soldiers, amounting to two thousand silver drachmas, which he sent to Jerusalem to provide for an expiatory sacrifice. In doing this he acted in a very excellent and noble way, inasmuch as he had the resurrection of the dead in view; for if he were not expecting the fallen to rise again, it would have been useless and foolish to pray for them in death. But if he did this with a view to the splendid reward that awaits those who had gone to rest in godliness, it was a holy and pious thought. Thus he made atonement for the dead that they might be freed from this sin."

"I have my Bible for that." That is what you said. Well, what if you live before the year 400 A.D. when the New Testament had not even been compiled? What if you lived before 1440 A.D. and never owned a Bible because the printing press wasn't invented? What would you have done? Do you think Jesus wanted private interpretation? Do you think He wanted the world to wait until the 15th century for the truth? I don't think so. The Catholic Church offers the only true interpretation of the Bible. It would be a great hypocricy on your part to believe anything other than that.

St. Paul in 1 Corinthians 3:11-15:

"For other foundation no man can lay, but that which is laid; which is Christ Jesus. Now if any man build upon this foundation, gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay stubble: Every man's work shall be manifest; for the day of the Lord shall declare it, because it shall be revealed in fire; and the fire shall try every man's work, of what sort it is. If any man's work abide, which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work burn, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire."

The tradition of the Jews is put forth with precision and clearness in 2 Maccabees. Judas, the commander of the forces of Israel, making a gathering . . . sent twelve thousand drachmas of silver to Jerusalem for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead, thinking well and religiously concerning the resurrection (For if he had not hoped that they that were slain should rise again, it would have seemed superfluous and vain to pray for the dead). And because he considered that they who had fallen asleep with godliness, had great grace laid up for them. It is therefore a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins. (2 Maccabees 12:43-46)

At the time of the Maccabees the leaders of the people of God had no hesitation in asserting the efficacy of prayers offered for the dead, in order that those who had departed this life might find pardon for their sins and the hope of eternal resurrection. It is unfortunate that the Protestant Bible has taken away from God's Word, in direct violation of Scripture.

It was a common practice in Judaism centuries before Christianity, and the Christians inherited it from the synagogues. Of course, that fact would be evident if Protestants hadn't cut the Jewish "Apocrypha" out of the Bible in 1769.

On another note, how is praying for the dead "contacting spirits"?

How did the practice of moaning and juggling snakes come about? How about televangelism, complete with fake white hair? How about this nonsense of people falling over when some pastor or another touches them because they know they're on TV?

What about the practice of people saying "God doesn't like this" or "God doesn't like that"? Why is it okay for some people to "speak for God", but not okay when others claim to do the same?

EDIT: I'm using these examples because non-Catholics love to nitpick everything Catholics do but are quick to defend themselves if they, in turn, are questioned. Is it really necessary to question every practice that every faith does that you don't observe? How would you feel if all of the practices of your faith were questioned, particularly if someone highlighted passages in the Bible to stress the "relevance" of their argument? Why do you think there are so many denominations within Protestantism now? Answering questions with questions is the Socratic method; it's meant to make points, and to make you think about your own question, as well as the question posed in retrospect. Is it really such a threat to you that Catholics pray for the souls of the deceased? Many religions do this, and many of them older than Christianity. I just have a problem with your wording of "God certainly doesn't like it", because you presume that God agrees with everything you do and therefore disagrees with anyone who doesn't follow the exact same practices you do. It's petty, and presumptuous... and to be fair, you're not the first to do it and likely not the last.

kcchaplain and jbtascam have pointed out the actual answer to your question far more eloquently than I could have... I refer to their answers, in this case. For a purely Christian point of view, 4HIM makes a simple but good argument, as well.

Oh, let them pray...it won't do anything, but if it makes them feel better...the Catholic Church has a whole lot more to answer to, than praying for the dead...here is a book the Catholics added to the word of God, that is not accepted by Christian denominations...:::::

Check out this scripture: "It is a holy and a wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins." (2nd Machabees 12:46)

Don't recognize it??? I'm not surprised....but this is where they get it from..

No prayer for the dead is going to help. "A person is appointed to die once, and then the judgment" and that is a scripture in the King James Bible... If we are supposed to pray for the dead than Jesus came for nothing.

We arent contacting the dead when we pray for them. I dont know the origin of the practice, but it doesnt seem like a bad idea. You've just lost a loved one and you pray they have gone on to a better place. What's the harm in that?