But one family has made me cross. The deceased was brought up in a very religious family but has moved away from his faith. As a result, he wants a non-religious ceremony, which is why I was called.
I met with his son, who told me some lovely tales of his father's life, some stuff was funny, other stuff really demonstrated that the deceased had the human frailties of us all, but that he was essentially a decent man.
I spent Sunday afternoon writing up the tribute part of the ceremony. Yes, I had included
some of the funny bits, but I was, essentially painting my usual picture of the chap - not ignoring his faults, but emphasising his qualities.
Then, yesterday morning, I got a call from the son that I had met. Apparently his elder sister thinks that we are taking the mickey out of Dad, and so I was given dictation over the phone of what they want me to say. It will take me about 90 seconds, tops.
I could certainly (and would willingly) tone down the funny bits of the tribute, if the family wanted, but I'm not even allowed to do that. I am to say exactly as I've been told. I warned the son that we wouldn't have many words in the ceremony, and he seemed to accept that, giving me to understand that this is more to do with the lack of a faith leader in the ceremony than anything else.
This has made me somewhat cross.
- The deceased isn't getting a fitting tribute, and I am short changing him, but yes, he is dead, and the ceremony is for his family, so they must have what they want. It doesn't sit well with me, though.
- I don't want anyone thinking that this is a typical humanist ceremony. I will do my best with what I can, and explain (tactfully) that the structure of the ceremony is at the family's request, but it is going to be a very poor show, and that worries me.
- If I were a religious minister, would I be as flexible? Or would I insist on certain things in the ceremony. Probably, but I don't think that the stuff I'm being asked to leave out can come under any heading of "essential" if the family don't want it.
- I could have spent that time so much better on another family's ceremony.
Ultimately, I'm just here to do what the family want. What a shame they want such a rubbish thing.
5 comments:
I've had similar, X.piry, though not as drastic.
It is disappointing, isn't it? I am sure you are right to make it clear in the funeral, in a tactful way, that this is what the family want. Just as when a family give you something beautiful they have written that they want read out, or a really well-chosen poem, you would credit the family before you read it.
When I'm handed a passage the family wants me to read out, I suppose it is arrogant, as I have occasionally felt, to think that it would be better if they'd given me the passage as notes, talked to me, and let me write it - after all, we are trained to write this stuff, and have done a lot of it, and sometimes we even get told that we've done it really well!
Well, yes, I guess it is arrogant of me - because it is theirs. Just as it doesn't matter that "My Way" makes me come out in a rash. Their choice. I suppose it's what architects might feel when the client says "very interesting, but I want mock-tudor beams on the front." At least you won't have to look at the ceremony for the next 40 years...
But it is hard if people think that a poorly-written and perfunctory family-written ceremony is "the humanist model," as some sneerer wrote recently, assuming that all our ceremonies are the same. An elderly woman of my acquaintance went to a funeral which sounded like the one troubling you, and said afterwards "Didn't think much of that, only took ten minutes, shan't have a humanist, I want a proper funeral."
Well, life isn't fair, no reason why its immediate aftermath should be. At least, with our beliefs, we don't think "the deceased" (dreadful title) is looking down and tutting!
Hi Gloriamundi - thank you for your comments.
I don't know if we're arrogant if we want to re-write stuff - particularly if the English of the original is appalling, but yes, you're right, we have to smile sweetly and read it out, regardless.
This situation has actually got more complicated (of course!). The deceased had a step-family (the circumstances of which are adding to the conflict). I have now spoken to a step child (also an executor of the will, so obviously in a position of trust with our deceased man) and had to break the news that the "script" I'd been instructed to read contains no mention of a second marriage. Naturally, the step-child felt very upset. I think I'm going to get around it in very vague terms, although this may not be to the liking of all of the family. I was reconciling myself to that when this good person said "well, one of the sons has been inside for violent crime!".
Tin hats and flack jackets, I think. It's a ceremony late in the day, so I think I'm just going to take my car keys and funeral words with me, and give myself a chance of a hasty exit!
Man, there's going to be a lot of chocolate eaten before this ceremony is done!
Thanks again for your comment. We just have to do our best, don't we?
Stone me! What a mess, I do feel for you.
One of us in a similar situation simply said to herself "who's the funeral arranger? Right, I'll do what they tell me, they are the FD's client and indirectly mine too."
Not an argument for natural justice, but I could see her point. At least it enabled her to say, to any objectors afterwards, a version of "I was doing what I was told to do by the person in authority."
People sometimes think such things are down to the so-called next of kin. But there isn't one, apparently, in any legally binding sense. The executor would have a big pull, I guess, if the man who's died had laid down something in his will.
It's all sad and a long way from what you want - but you're right - plenty of choc, get through it, and leave the engine running...
Further point - since whatever the circumstances there will be a funeral, I am sure, from the way you've written about it,(not just trying to be nice) that it could not be in safer hands, and yes, we just do our best, so that's as good as it could get.
Oh, blimey, this is SO difficult! Your title says it all. (It perhaps says something if not everything about the modern funeral, too...)
Some random reflections.
1. Talk about this as a funeral, not a humanist funeral.
2. Make it starkly clear that this ceremony has been created under the direction of (name them). Then stress that the words you will speak are their words. When people hear who 'wrote' it they will probably understand the negative compromises.
3. Pump in padding. Lots of thoughts about life and death. Several poems. They may appreciate the effect this has on bringing the funeral up to a respectable length (and people expect people behind lecterns to bang on a lot). Word music. They don't listen to words so much as the sound they make. Sound off.
4. Do that and, at the same time, stress the impotence of words at a time like this ("The words we speak today cannot do justice to the life of XXXX. You know how you feel about him. That feeling for him that you carry with you in your heart, and will carry always, is the greatest tribute that anyone can pay to him...") and lead them on a meditation with many, many interspersed silences: "I want you now to spend a few moments reflecting on XXXX and all he means to you... Think of a time he made you happy... A time he made you laugh... Recall something important he once said to you..." This is a good way of whacking the ball back into their court and making them do some work. "Whenever you remember XXXX, you commemorate him, you honour his memory. And it is not just your memories of XXXX that you will carry with you into the future. Your lives have been shaped to a greater or lesser extent by XXXX, by his values, his example. What were those values...? I want you now to reflect now on the ways in which XXXX will go on influencing you..." You can get five mins out of that. Ten if you're resolute. Fifteen if you're really cross with them.
Is a celebrant a cipher or a person in their own right? I think we all experience a growing tendency (it's the fruit of experience) to want to give people the funeral they need rather than the one they say they want. It is exactly the reason why so many FDs are so self-important. We think we know best. We DO!
This is going to be a pretty empty funeral. I don't know that there's anything you can do about it other than throw their homework back at them (commercial self-harm at the least), walk off the job (ditto), or just do it and forget it as soon as you can (it will at least be eminently forgettable). It is why I no longer do funerals for anyone (though I am happy to be consulted).
Hey, I've banged on really quite a lot here! I tend to feel very let-off-the-leash when commenting on other people's blogs! Woof-woof!
Post a Comment