Wednesday 7 October 2009

Marching to the edge of eternity

The purpose of a funeral is to express and reaffirm beliefs that make sense of a death in terms of, both, the tenets of the dead person and those of the living. We don’t see a lot of common purpose in an age in which faith has fragmented. All funerals alienate to a greater or lesser extent.

As a result, there is a move to make them less offensive, more inclusive. Secularists draw disparate mourners together by finding common ground: by focussing on the dead person and celebrating their life. Sorrow is tempered by joy. Where spirituality is addressed, it is with fondness rather than fervour. Heaven is envisioned not as an exclusive venue of staggering magnificence but, rather, a nice place for a picnic. Where such a ceremony is bland and euphemistic, we are indulgent. It is the price of compromise. Where there are football shirts on the coffin, banal poetry, Henry Scott Holland and mawkish or sniggermaking songs, we redouble our indulgence. We’ve all done the diversity training. We bite our tongues behind arranged smiles.

The secular funeral is an evolving rite. If it bungles sometimes, we should not be surprised.

The benchmark against which secularists measure its progress is, of course, the poor, bloody Christian funeral, a rite which has much to answer for, especially when conducted with the disengaged perfunctoriness for which it has achieved especial notoriety. For all that, we can only pity all those priests who have ever presided at funerals at which the congregation has glowered back at them with hollow, hostile eyes, alienated by the very liturgy that they had called upon the priest to deliver.

Christians, too, are now moving towards a more conciliatory, secular way of doing things. And this is the subject of a very interesting essay by Thomas G Long. “These newer practices,” he says, “are attractive mainly because they seem to offer relief from the cosmeticized, sentimental, impersonal and often costly funerals that developed in the 1950s, which were themselves parodies of authentic Christian rituals.” And yet, he says: “Contemporary Christian funeral practices certainly need to be changed, but change should be more a matter of recovery and reformation than innovation and improvisation.”

Christian funeral rites, he says, need to be ‘pristinised’. We note, here, that almost every innovation in funerals draws its inspiration from the past. But what is interesting about Professor Long’s analysis is that it is, I think, equally instructive to secularists.

He identifies three elements in a funeral: preparation, processional, burial. “The funeral itself was deemed to be the last phase of a lifelong journey toward God, and the faithful carried the deceased along the way to the place of final departure with singing and a mixture of grief and joyful hope.”

The metaphor of life as a journey collapsed in theological uncertainties. The result? “Dead Christians have nowhere to go but to evaporate into the spiritual ether and into our frail memory banks. With heaven domesticated, the soul morphed into an immortal gas, the corpse become a shell and the cemetery moved out of sight, it was almost inevitable that the dead with their embarrassing bodies would be banned from their own funerals and the living would be condemned to sit motionless, contemplating the meaning of it all and pretending to celebrate life as the nephew of the deceased sings ‘When Irish Eyes Are Smiling.’”

So like a secular funeral, yes?

He concludes: “Surely our culture will eventually weary of such liturgical and spiritual thinness and be ready for more depth, for more truth—for our sake and for the sake of those we love. When we are, the great drama of the journey to God will be there, beckoning us to join the procession of the saints. We will travel toward eternity with those we have loved, singing as we go and calling out to the distant shore in words of confident hope.”

It’s heady stuff, imbued with a sense of certainty unattainable by secularists with at best a fuzzy spirituality.

Yet the metaphor of life as a journey is just as strong and relevant to secularists, just as much of an inspiration, as is Professor Long’s metaphor of “the cosmic drama ... of marching to the edge of eternity.”

Secular funerals are beginning to find words and music with which to celebrate a life and even expound a fuzzy spirituality. What they have yet to find is the actions, the rituals. But do they not, also, enact the cosmic drama of marching to the edge of eternity—even if that is an eternity of nonexistence?

Yes, they do. The element of processional is indispensable.

Read Professor Long’s essay in full here.

Hear him speak here: http://wjkbooks.typepad.com/files/wjk-radio-8_-thomas-g.-long-on-the-christian-funeral.mp3


Labels:

1 Comments:

Anonymous Jonathan Taylor said...

Remember the expression, from somewhere or other: "The death throes of a dying civilization"? Professor Long(good name)'s rambling essay seems to be calling for a resurrection where there isn't one coming, a pining for an object lost at sea.

But let me not be too hard on the man. "In order to buy time, the individual must defend himself against the complete realization of his loss. If defence were complete, he could not begin to adjust to the problem (achieve a fresh identity). But his defences are partial blocks which alternate, or co-exist, with painful realization. In this context, the searching that follows bereavement is a form of facilitative behaviour whose function is the recovery of the lost object. It is not itself a defence, although it depends upon a defence (partial denial of the permanence of the loss) for its occurrence." (Colin Murray Parkes)

Your comments, Charles, about secular funerals in this connection are clearly drawn from experience, and I know exactly what you're talking about, especially having witnessed some of the humanists' attempts to hijack the funeral ritual with their 'There's probably no god' campaign. But "bland and euphemistic" is not a description of many of the deeply moving, simultaneously harrowing and uplifting and funny and tragic funerals I've experienced, which leave the living in a profoundly different place from that in which they began this journey. The question remains, however: where do they leave the dead?

Well, it's not the job of a secular celebrant to provide answers. But it is his job to provoke questions in a way they can at least be contemplated. He doesn't have the luxury of a reference book to quote from, or signposts to point the congregation to. People choose a secular funeral simply because they don't want a christian one; they know only what they don't want, and come to the celebrant asking, 'what happens next?' One valid response could be, 'you tell me'. As Jesus is quoted (in The Aquarian Gospel of Jesus the Christ): "I came not to lead Man, but to show the possibilities of Man."

If there is one innovation in funerals that doesn't draw inspiration from the past, it is the way they allow the congregation to find their own answers from the material presented. Or rather, collaborated on. We cannot have a processional without a defined destination, unless we all agree we've no idea where we're going and are content to carry the coffin into the unknown.

And that's about it in a nutshell.

7 October 2009 at 16:55  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home