Bishop of Meath bans eulogies at funeral masses

petronius wrote: »

If you are having a a funeral (or a wedding for that matter) in a religious building you should respect to those who are members of that community.
It should be personalised and related to the individual of course but only within the boundaries of respect.

If not hold it elsewhere - I am sure there are plenty of hotels who would easily rent a room out
although if you have ever been to a memorial service in the states with multiple eulogies and were left wondering were they two different people.

I agree with Petronius.
You should respect members of a community, especially in their time of grief and sadness, manners are manners.

I haven't been to a memorial service in the states, but I have been to enough funeral masses in Ireland and like petronius I often wondered who they were talking about, sometimes (usually not always) but sometimes two different people.

On a sad note, a few years ago I attended the removal of an old nun, who was a tough teacher in her day. I didn't know her personally, I knew her family. So out of respect for the family I went to the removal and mass the following day.

I hate removals, the receiving line, shaking hands with the relatives, saying sorry for your troubles etc, and I get emotional. I find it awkward, I know that's just my problem.

Anyway at the removal, I shook the hand of an elderly male relative of hers and he said, "I know she was tough, I'm so sorry. Please forgive her."

The next day at the funeral mass there was a young neighbour of mine at the mass. So before the mass, you know the way it is, hanging around chatting, I just asked him why he was there. I quote what he said "She taught me in Junior Infants and I thought I'd turn up to make sure she was dead."

The priest at the mass spoke of her in glowing terms. I don't like speak ill of the dead, but that funeral still has me confused.

Aineoil wrote: »

I agree with Petronius.
You should respect members of a community, especially in their time of grief and sadness, manners are manners.

I have said it before and I will say it again: Funerals are for the living, but they are about the dead.

If the person being buried would want or appreciate eulogies or music or humour, then they should be present, so that the funeral actually reflects their memory and passing. If people don't like this, then they obviously don't care about or respect the deceased and shouldn't be allowed monopolise the funeral at all.

Sarky wrote: »

See if you can work in the word 'c*nt' a few times too. Fantastic word, that.

New working title : C*ntankerous C**ksucker.

petronius wrote: »

I think respect is the main guideline
Respect the deceased
Respect the family and friends
Respect the venue and those in attendance

Heard on talk radio show last night on this topic about a eulogy which effectively insulted some family members - over not visiting a relative or pulling their weight during the relatives illness

Seems a lot of people here wish to copy Graham Chapman, or Python themed funerals- maybe there is a market for hosting such events.

Your post is somewhat confused. You say respect the diseased and the relatives as well as the venue and those in attendance, but then you seem to argue that the wishes of the deceased, and presumably their relative be ignored if it does not respect some other people or the venue... Which is it?

Personally I think the church is fully entitled to decide what can and cannot happen at events in or on its property. If you don't like it then perhaps you need to evaluate your attendance to that particular club.

I hope more parishes follow the lead here. It is publicity own goals like this that slowly get people to realise what this particular organisation really is.

MrP

How is it confusing to respect everyone?
If it is going to offend some of the family don't say it in a eulogy its not the place for it.
If your going to resurrect some family feud don't use a funeral for that
If people come to pay their respects to the deceased don't insult them
If you choose to have the funeral in a church then respect it and the minister, vicar, or priest

Every Jewish ceremony I have been to I am always intrigued by them (weddings particularly), and note how all those in attendance (mostly non-jews) do show respect and reverence to the rituals, observers and rabbi

I spoke at the funeral mass for my dad last year, and so did my brother. We kept our speeches pretty short. I brought prepared notes, and spent a lot of time thinking about the best way I could represent my dad, and my family. My brother spoke very briefly, after my slightly longer speech. All told, it was probably no longer than 10 minutes (and probably much shorter, though my recollection is a bit poor. I still have the speech though, so I know it wasn't an essay!)

And people laughed at his funeral, because my speech included some anecdotes that were funny; my dad was a big practical joker, and almost always laughing, so a sombre speech that ignored that would, in my opinion, not have represented my dad very well. We weren't insulted or offended that people laughed, and my family and I laughed along with them. The music was religious, except for the final song which was, at dad's request, Always Look on the Bright Side of Life. Though dad's death was sudden, and I'm not sure he really knew he was about to die, he had mentioned it often. We printed the lyrics on the back of the mass booklets, and one enduring memory of that day is the sound of the congregation singing along to the song (as I had encouraged them to do during the eulogy).

We were lucky, because the priest who said the mass actually knew my family. He's related to us somehow, has visited us and spent time with our family, and actually married my parents. So his reflection was lovely - it was about my dad, not about some deathbed saint that no one knew. He acknowledged that dad wasn't religious, but that he did good in his own way, and that this was really the point anyway. He spoke beautifully about my dad.

Much of the rest of the day is a blur, and I think that, if we had been told we couldn't speak, or couldn't have that song, we would have been upset. Speaking at the graveside wouldn't have worked for us - though our funeral director brought his own PA system to the grave, and it was good, it was also very crowded. Over 1000 people, as far as we can tell, came to dad's funeral, so not everyone could get anywhere near the actual grave.

I suppose I can understand why they want to enforce ritual and the rules, and bring people back to church music and tributes that they deem appropriate, but it is a move that seems without empathy. I know that some families squabble, or use the eulogy to score points or settle a fight, and that's a shame, but there will always be people who want to behave like children. If this move does encourage more people to seek out alternatives to the traditional funeral, I'll be delighted, as it will also encourage the development of more alternative services.