When my wife's thesis supervisor and research partner passed away, they just had a reception at the Unitarian Fellowship (the same one that I now attend). No real service or ceremony, just a gathering of family and friends with food and drink. She was an active member and past president of the fellowship (and, indirectly, gets credit for introducing me to UU'ism) so there was a good turnout of members. She was a dean at the university so that community was well represented, too. Quite a nice way to celebrate a life, I thought.

 

Mendalla

 

Was the resurrection spoken of? Proclaimed? Everything else is choreography.

DKS - wouuldn't that be a given?

You would be surprised at how often it is not. Especially in the United Church.

I'm not sure I understand the question:   "Was the resurrection proclaimed?" 

Are we talking about the resurrection of Jesus?

Or are we talking about the physical resurrection of the body of the deceased person?

Or are we talking about spiritual resurrection or eternal life?
.
Sorry, but 70 years in the UCC, and having attended many funerals in the UCC and other denominations, and I'm not sure what proclaiming the resurrection means.

Thanks for making my point. We are often unclear (because the officiant is unclear) about the fact that death is not the end. We go on to be with God. We are people of the resurrection. Happened to Jesus and it will happen to us. For a much deeper and very readable explanation of this, Dr. Tom Long's "Accompany Them With Singing" is a great place to begin.

chansen, DKS is right.  In a Christian funeral/memorial/thanksgiving for a life the proclamation that death is not the final victor is essential, as is the reminder that GOd is with us as we travel through the vallley of the shadow of death

 

And having served as MC for gatherings that were only storytelling and not the sharing of the messsage of hope or promise of life beyond death, and then talking to folks afterwards (admittedly church folk) I would say that many people find something missing in them.  And I suggest that they are much less healing as well.

ok, I don't think I have ever been to a funeral where the resurrection was not proclaimed - as in death is not the end.
.
I thought that maybe you were talking about a physical resurrection of the body.

FWIW, here is my latest meditation (for tomorrow's celebration of life service)

http://worshipofferings.blogspot.ca/

I was really impressed how you started out there, Gord. I appreciated the first three paragraphs. The next seven are spent invoking God and Jesus. It's a 70:30 split between God and the deceased. I still maintain that's too high.

 

And where you go into "Where is our hope?", when probably surrounded by the people who will carry on with the help of one another, you point to God. Surely, the friends and family are due at least equal billing with this unseen deity.

 

And...there it is. In the last paragraph: "We know that life's hardships are somehow easier when we face them together so we support one another." All that time and all those words paying lip service to an invisible God only half the people in your church that day even believe in, and you don't even acknowledge their continuous support beyond the gathering except for one sentence at the end.

 

I know it's a church service. I just can't get around how, no matter how religious the deceased was, the service suddenly becomes mainly about some mythical afterlife about which even half your parishoners, deep down, probably have doubts.

 

 

 

 

 

I really wish we in the church would not use the mortuary industry's "celebration of life" phraseology. Just another way to deny death and eventually, the resurrection. It's not our language.

It's a church service. We talk about our faith in that way. It's what we do and who we are.

DKS,

in this case it is the family who wanted that focus.  (I generally use thanksgiving for life myself) but the reality of death is well named thorughout the service..

.

chansen,

I continue to be amazed at your arrogance at assuming that the majority of people follow your understanding...even as you accuse another of arrogance.  Anyway I did not post the link for you--I knew how you would feel about it.  I posted it because the thread was about types of funerals and it was a sample of a funeral message.

 

 

Very meaningful to me, Gord.  The quote from Roman's is one of my favourites. 

 

Are you suggesting, then, that UU funerals have "something missing" and are "less healing"? Because we do not, as a matter of course, proclaim such a message since a large percentage of our membership or those non-members who engage our chaplains don't believe in it. Certainly, if a member and/or family did believe it, it would be part of the service but that is hardly the norm. "Celebration of Life" is actually a pretty good term for a UU funeral/memorial service.

 

Mendalla

 

IMO yes I do believe that Mendalla.  But of course I am more than willing to name that this comes from my obvious bias. 

 

Follow up question...how does a "standard" UU service (although I suspect that the nature of UU folk is that there is a wide variety of "standard") speak of moving through/beyond grief?  THe lack of healing I spoke of wsa because the family designed something that only did the naming of death and the sharing of stories but nothing that suggested that they would move foward into a new way of being.  For me, the "life beyond death" is both for the deceased but also how do we live now that ZZZ has died, where do we find life/light/hope again?

 

I understand there will be a Christian message at a Christian funeral. My biggest error is in thinking you should give equal mention to the deceased and the attendees, as you do to your deity.
.
Again, you'll likely be staring at a group of people of very diverse beliefs. Making 70% of your address about God defeating death is the most arrogant position here. The only way we know we cheat death is by what and who we leave behind. With these reasons to celebrate a life (and good on you for using that very appropriate language though DKS and others seem to reject it), and with a diverse audience, I think turning a funeral into just another church service is grandstanding.

Thanks everybody for your thoughtful posts on this thread. Chansen, I removed two of your posts, most of which was engaging commentary, but marred by your calling other WonderCafe visitors names and labeling others' beliefs as "idiotic" for example. That isn't an acceptable way to discuss or debate here, and I'm not going to edit people's posts line by line. Please self edit before posting, or you risk being banned. Thanks :-)

 

Obviously, it varies. My congregation is heavily humanist, so often there is no funeral per se, just a memorial of some kind. "Storytelling" as you put it. There are some Eastern types who believe in reincarnation but that's a whole different kettle of fish from a Christian resurrection (regardless of what some think). I don't know a single UU (who is still UU) who believes in a Christian style resurrection. In fact, some of our humanists became UU to get away from that stuff.

 

 

And that is the life beyond death (ie. the life that goes on in this world even though that person is gone) that we would speak of. We would generally talk about the contributions that the person made, the memories that they've left behind and how those will survive in the family and others. How we can keep them alive by keeping their ideals alive. They live on in the world through us, not through any kind of resurrection or afterlife. Afterlife ideas are, at best, a metaphor for many of us. Some of our families would likely give the minister a good kick in the can if he spoke of "resurrection" in a funeral for one of their loved ones.

 

I have not preplanned my funeral and don't intend to, but I would likely include the resurrection story in my service if I did; not because I believe in any of the theology around it (I do not believe that Jesus died so we could get into Heaven or to prepare us for a coming Day of Judgement) but because it is a powerful myth about renewal and new life following death. Birth - life - death - birth - ya da ya da. The cycle goes on. However, I would also include one of the Horace's odes on the theme of death. These reflect the Epicurean idea that death is the end and that we must take pleasure in and make the best of our lives because they are the only lives we have.

 

Mendalla

 

I struugle with that, but refuse to use the mortuary industry's phrase. I generally acknowledge we are "giving thanks fior the life of AA and claim our faith in the resurection."

Therein lies our foundational difference. Christians believe a funeral IS a worship service, whether you feel it is grandstanding or not. It is what we do and have done for thousands of years. And likely for many more, again in spite of your personal opinion.  

 

Even most UUs treat a funeral/memorial as a worship service, even if the format may sometimes be unorthodox to Christian eyes. The one I mentioned upthread that was just a reception is a bit of an outlier even for us.

 

Mendalla

 

But it doesn't have to be comprised of the same bullshit content. You have the option to take it down a notch and concentrate more on the people and less on the myth.

 

  The Myth (not myth) is the core of the story we believe and confess as Christians. I don't have an option. No pastor ever does.Focussing on people alone ignores the Mythic Story and denies the Myth (which you would like me to do, but I can't. Sorry).

 

I'm not saying to ignore it. But using Gord's example, making it mostly about God, and tangentially about the deceased and the family, is just ridiculous to anyone who isn't Christian. I think you have to respect that the audience for a funeral is not the same as your Sunday service. In many modern cases, even the children and grandchildren of the deceased do not believe. They are not there to pay respect to you and your beliefs, and making it a typical church service is wrong. A better balance can be struck.

 

I can imagine there are still occasionally cases where the deaths occur in very religious families, whi want a very religious service. But as Gord mentioned to you above, the family he was addressing specifically asked for it to be a "celebration of life service" - a very apt description of how many of us want to go out, but words you took exception to. And while Gord pointed to the family's request in his defense against your thinly-veiled charge that he wasn't doing it right, Gord posted this one as a service people could freely borrow from. I don't know why Gord or anyone else has to explain to you why they are calling it a "celebration of life".

 

Chansen, just don't call people names and mock their beliefs, then your posts won't be removed. It's pretty simple really.

To me, this seems like a topic that has no single right response. 

My partner wants a Christian funeral in the local United church, complete with a minister, hymns and prayers.  When I asked what hymns should be chosen the answer was "I don't care.  The usual ones, I guess, but I don't remember what they are".  The UC minister has never met my partner,  met me once when I was volunteering in the community, and hasn't met my kids/partners/grandkids.   I would find it really difficult to approach the UC (or any other) minister to run a funeral for one of my family.

My adult children have partners who would play the major role in planning those funerals should they be necessary.  My guess is that one would be a Christian service, the others more secular.   None of my own kids or partners  belong to a church.

I don't want a church based funeral for myself and have shared this information with my family.  The information is kept with my will - and they all know where to find it.  Some of my family were  distressed at first when I shared my thoughts and wishes.  One said they would be cheated out of a traditional event.  Another said that if I wanted a funeral like that they might just as well have a catered BBQ somewhere, spread the ashes and have a few cool ones while telling stories.  Sounded pretty good to me so I added it to the list of suggestions I already had prepared!

For people who regularly attend a particular church I do see value in having family weddings and funerals there.  For people who don't consider a church to be 'home' it seems a bit silly to me to insist on using their facilities for those life events. 

 

Aaron, just don't remove entire posts for one unacceptable word and I won't have to call you a lousy admin.

 

A funeral isn't about the deceased or their family. It's an opportunity to restate what we believe as people of faith. That's the entire intent and purpose of a funeral. The rest is largely irrelevant or a side story. We aren't asking anyone to believe anything; just respect the belief of the deceased and the family, who have requested that a Chrisitan minister give leadership in the worship service. If you don't want a Christian service, don't ask a Christian minister to give leadership.

No one is insisting a church be used. A Christian funeral can be held anywhere.

A non  Christian funeral can also be held anywhere.  I don't want a Christian funeral but I know people who seem to believe that unless it happens in a church with a presiding minister it isn't really a funeral. 

 

Go UU. You're still in a church; You still have a minister (or ordained lay chaplain if you're a non-member and that's how they operate). However, there's no set belief about death and the afterlife or set funeral rite. Everything is worked between the family and officiant. If the deceased left plans or instructions, they will likely be honoured so long as they are legal and don't violate our principles. Whether that will satisfy "those people" is open to question of course, but I know it mollified my father when we decided to have a naming & dedication for our son instead of a Christian baptism.

 

By the way, funerals do not require any kind of legal status for the officiant, unlike weddings. It's entirely up to the church and family who can and does officiate. One of our current lay chaplains did a memorial before she even started her chaplaincy training.

 

Mendalla

 

A defrocked United Church minister does a large number of funerals in this city.

Chansesn oonce again you are making flawed assumptions.  The family chose that name because they wanted that the focus, to celebrate his life rather than focus on the sorrow that comes with death or suggest his death is a tragedy.  That does not mean they do not want a religious service.

And the purpose of the sermon/meditation.message is not the person.  NEver.  There are other parts of the service for that.  ANd I let other people do those things because they are better suited to do it.  THe purpose of the message is, well, the message, to proclaim Christian Hope.  Sometimes that is done weaving in stories about the person but the focus is the message.

Chansen, you're a smart guy, but in case you haven't figured it out yet, it really doesn't matter at all to me what you think of my admin skills.

UU isn't an option here.  Lots of small Christian denominations though.  Also several local people who are quite capable of officiating at a non religious event.  An actual officiant isn't even necessary if it is just a gathering of friends and family sharing stories and casting ashes before the wind.

 

I have no problem with others choosing a religious event at the end of a life.  Attending funerals is something I do fairly often and I care not whether that happens in an RC, Anglican, Lutheran, United , Baptist or other type of church. 

 

I'm under no impression that it does, but it is incredibly frustrating to me that you are okay with being this bad at it. Your reliance on removing posts and threads as a first resort is equal parts weak and stupid, and you show zero interest in changing from that strategy. It's mind boggling.

 

In this case, I could almost see removing the first post, but removing the second was asinine.

 

Sorry Chansen, but replacing the offending word by suggesting a rhyming word is cute, but doesn't make it right.  Thanks for your understanding.

That's just it - I don't. I don't understand how you can read a well-written reply with one or two words you deem unacceptable, and just delete the whole thing because you won't spend the 10 seconds it takes to remove the words, then take a minute to compose a reply, explaining why you won't take 10 seconds.

 

The first post of mine in this thread you deleted, I hardly cared about. It was just a shot at DKS for being uppity with seeler, but I think most people could see that without my help. Removing the second post was annoying as hell. And what did I do wrong in that one? That I can tell, I called DKS a "diva" for wanting to put himself and his faith front-and-centre at a funeral that isn't his, and I called the resurrection "idiotic".

 

I stand behind both comments, but if you deem they must be removed for the post to stand, then fine. Using them as an excuse why you had to delete the entire post and threaten me with a ban was just you taking the easy way out again, and driving a wedge in the process.

 

So, here's the post again, with the words removed, and no rhymes in their place:

 

 

And yes, I'm saving this thread (and others) as I go, because I no longer trust you with anything I post.

 

It appears this article is germane to the topic of this thread...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gary-laderman/how-do-we-do-right-by-the_b_...

True, Gord. But does popular theology and mediated by social media trump Christian faith in all its multitude of expressions? Not for me.

Which is why you're going to be left behind.

 

You want to be able to say, "We are Christians, and this is how Christian funerals go, or you're not doing it right."

 

Families are increasingly saying, "We don't care what you want, it's our family member, and this is how we want them remembered."

 

Holding on to an outdated way of conducting a funeral service, just so you can feel good about satisfying the requirements of some bronze age shepherds, is just one more way you're out of touch with the population and sinking deeper and deeper into irrelevance.

 

I would agree with the first part of your sentence. We are Christians and this is what we believe.  

"Right, so family, I know what you asked for, but this is what I'm going to do. Everyone else who is here to support the family, stay seated and listen to me drone on and on about a resurrection story you probably find insane and not at all related to the person whose life you're here to not celebrate."
 

 

Can you provide proof that this is what families are saying?  Because it is not realy what I am hearing from them.

Gord, you gave an example above, that DKS already took exception to. I explained above that I went to a UCCan service where the resurrection narrative wasn't memorable, and that's the sort of thing I would have noticed.

 

Families are no longer homogenous believing families. I'm saying that, at a funeral especially, you should be more accommodating and inclusive, and not make a point of grandstanding with your faith.

 

Not to derail my own thread but DSK you hit the nail on the head - quoting you

 " would agree with the first part of your sentence. We are Christians and this is what we believe.  "

I don’t think you can define what “we” as the collective United Church, believe.  

I think I can, actually. It's in the front of The Manual and our four (count 'em! Four!) statements of faith PLUS Scripture! If it's not based there, it ain't a reflection of us. Which leads back to my question about the resurrection being preached.

 

Sharing the faith story and  making it a key part of a faith-based worship service is hardly what I would call grandstanding.  In my example above did I say the family did not want the faith story shared?  No, I said the family wanted it called a celebration of life.  DKS and I may disagree (and do) on how things are done.  But I think you are reading into his posts a thing that is not there (diva, grandstanding, making it about him....)