HE’S right, the Bishop of Meath, for wanting to rescue the Catholic
funeral from modern misconceptions of what it is meant to be.It is not really about the deceased’s time on earth at all or those who grieve its ending, but about the prospect of eternal life with a compassionate God whose mercy the mourners are meant to appeal to on their lost loved one’s behalf to help add a little oil to the hinges of the pearly gates.
That’s the theology, that’s the tradition, that’s the expectation of the Vatican and the reminder issued by Bishop Michael Smith.
And yet a central message of the Catholic Church is that life is precious, and it seems in keeping with this that a family and a community should use a deceased’s last moments among them to reinforce that message by demonstrating just how priceless they were to them with whatever words and music speaks for them.
Of course, Bishop Smith is correct in saying there is plenty of Church music and hymns to choose from without anyone having to call upon pieces more usually heard in pubs, on the late night love-in slot on local radio, or accompanying some dramatic moment in a Hollywood weepie.
But I was at the funeral of Ronnie Drew of The Dubliners when an eclectic gathering filled the church with all manner of music — poignant, joyful and rousing — which the sacred building itself seemed to welcome by way of the natural amplification it provided the performers.
Yes, it’s stretching it to suggest ‘McAlpine’s Fusiliers’ has a Christian content as required by Bishop Smith — although faith undoubtedly sustained many of emigrants the song honours — yet the performances felt like a spirited demonstration of the Church’s own teachings on the existence of life after death.
Bishop Smith’s arguments regarding the unsuitability of secular texts during Requiem Mass definitely have merit.
But I was at the funeral of one of the Irish victims of the 2004 tsunami and her family chose to print on the cover of her personalised pamphlet a passage from American writer, Mitch Albom.
It was the one that begins “Lost love is still love. It takes a different form, that’s all” and usually ends with the reader blinking away a tear.
Lucy Coyle’s family had an agonising four-month wait for her remains to be recovered and identified, and words like these helped sustain them through an unimaginable ordeal.
Even if they were penned by someone who writes about baseball and ice hockey as much as he does the mysteries of life, it is hard to think that those words would do anything other than complement the scripture that filled the rest of the pamphlet.
Bishop Smith is rightfully concerned about the hijacking of the homily which he fears has been usurped by eulogy.
It is not for man to elevate the deceased to some kind of terrestrial saint.
That’s God’s job and he alone will judge just how well any candidate for a heavenly residence did in following the commandments on the road to salvation.
But is it so wrong to see the good in people? The Catholic Church is particularly strong on forgiveness and loving the sinner, so is a little eulogy all that inappropriate?
Bishop Smith is no fool. Allow a little and they’ll take all day, is presumably one of his concerns, prompting him to point out that the Church’s rules state: “A brief homily, based on the readings, should always be given at the funeral liturgy, but never any kind of eulogy.
“The homilist should dwell on God’s compassionate love and on the paschal mystery of the Lord proclaimed in the Scripture readings.”
But I have been at funerals where such demands for brevity and narrowly focused theological themes would have been a dereliction of pastoral duty by the priests who thankfully overlooked them.
These were funerals no community should ever have to face — of two little cousins drowned when the ice cracked on the frozen lake where they played in Co Monaghan, of five schoolgirls killed when their school bus overturned in Co Meath, of five young people wiped out in a car crash in Co Donegal in 2005, and of the seven friends and neighbour who followed them in 2010.
Each time, priests used the homily to speak at length in painstakingly chosen and delicately delivered words to try to offer comfort and context amid the despair, bewilderment, anger and anguish around them.
Other times they have been political, personal and strong on social commentary. Always they have tried to be inclusive of the mixed group of believers, non-believers and questioners seated in front of them.
Inclusivity is missing from Bishop Smith’s reminder which seems intent on pushing the personal element of the funeral Mass outside of the Church.
“If family members or others wish to speak about the deceased this can be done at the graveside, or when the family and friends gather after the burial,” he states.
It’s difficult to speak and be heard in a cemetery with no public address system, standing between tightly packed graves inaccessible to wheelchairs, prams or anyone not possessing two steady legs and a strong pair of mountain boots, with rain pelting down on all and sundry.
Perhaps tributes could be paid beforehand at the funeral home, or afterwards, as Bishop Smith suggests, when family and friends gather at the pub or some other welcoming venue.
While they’re there, they could pass round the books of condolences as Bishop Smith is concerned about how the signings are conducted and says some priests want the books taken out of the church altogether.
But doesn’t the Catholic Church call on its followers to stand up and be counted? A signature not only offers support to a grieving family but says that the signatory participated in a Catholic ceremony and were happy to put their name to that deed.
Why is the Catholic Church, at a time when it needs more people on the inside of its churches and at the heart of its activities, nudging them towards the door?
If the most moving and memorable moments of a funeral — and for many mourners, that means the personal touches — are to take place outside of the Church, chances are the relevance of what takes place inside it will diminish.
Funeral homes and humanist celebrants are happy to arrange secular ceremonies and they may have Bishop Smith to thank for adding to their workload.
The Bishop does have a point, even if he made it insensitively, dismissing as “dumbing down” what many Catholics would see as warming up the Requiem Mass.
He’s concerned about preserving the “dignity” and “integrity” of the funeral and worried that if you dilute it, you devalue it.
So in theory and in theology, he is absolutely right. But as a strategy for retaining, never mind growing, the Catholic faithful, his stance couldn’t be more wrong.