Bishop [Peter] Forster says that is “to go to a funeral only to find that the cremation or burial has taken place earlier in the day, and the funeral has become a celebration of the deceased’s life.”
This, he says, “jars”. And he goes on: “There have always been occasions when of necessity a funeral has been held without a body, but that seems different from a deliberate decision to hold a small private ”˜funeral’ before a larger ”˜celebration’ or ”˜commemoration’.
“I think there are several reasons why I regret this new trend in our society ”” and especially when it invades the church.”
Bishop Forster says the trend “easily gives the impression that our bodies don’t matter much”. But we are not, he avers, “spiritual chips off some cosmic block longing to return home.” Rather, we are “sacred individuals, made in God’s image, body, soul and spirit.”
Well, going to a funeral (or service of celebration and thanksgiving) without a body there may bother him, but it doesn’t bother me. I actually think there’s more of a focus on the person when the corpse isn’t there. Sorry if that’s heretical, but I really don’t care.
I agree with you David. Perhaps the Bishop should concern himself more with the living who are in need, and “let the dead bury the dead.”
But it isn’t just the absence of the body.
Increasingly, families ask the clergy to make the funeral a celebration of the person’s life, not a morbid or even sad occasion.
As officiating clergy, we are being invited to collude in secular society’s denial of death. As pastors we surely need to help people recognise the trauma of bereavement (or one can foresee further difficulties of unacknowledged grief in the future).
There is nothing like a funeral (I speak from a UK context) for bringing to the surface the inconsistent and largely pagan ideas many people carry around with them about death and what happens after. Just listening to people’s tributes at funerals is a real eye-opener. And as ministers of the gospel we should be pointing to Jesus as the resurrection and the life.
I had better say nothing after hitting the press for similar comments last year!!!
OK . . . are the prayers offered? Is the gospel read? Is the resurrection proclaimed? Overall, is the faith of the church set forth objectively, so as to avoid a narcissistic “celebration of life”? Is the burial a burial, that is, is dirt cast on the coffin or urn with the reminder that we are dust? I do believe an objective liturgy allows space and time for affectionate memories of the person who has died, provided, again, that the reality of death is not denied or avoided, the gospel is read, the prayers offered, and the resurrection proclaimed as the gracious work of God (not an entitlement). The one serious loss in all this is the commendation.
Perhaps I’m being a little defensive as I routinely accept a family’s request for burial before the liturgy. However, at the risk of gnosticism, I simply don’t believe that presence or absence of the body is the dividing line between culture and the church.
Oh, I just had to read the whole thing! The topic interests one who is even older than the bishop. Bishop Forster’s closing sentence: “When we organise a funeral we set out liturgically to accompany the deceased on his or her journey to God. That’s why funerals are so important and why the person, in the form of their body, should be part of the ritual itself. Only then will a funeral also become a witness to the resurrection.†I couldn’t agree more. Cremation, receptions, gatherings may come after a liturgically proper funeral. No more beautiful words are spoken than in the Burial Office. I want my body to be there!