I wrote the following post in June of 2009, and given Pres. Packer’s passing, it seems newly timely. Will anyone dare to speak about Pres. Packer at his funeral? [1]
***
What do you want your funeral to be like? Do you care or do you figure you’ll be dead anyway? How do you feel about burial vs. cremation? Are you an organ donor?
This is a topic that always excites some feeling, whether you are Mormon or not. We all wonder about the legacy we will leave behind and what will be our life’s legacy. How will we be remembered?
Boyd K. Packer has spoken twice on the topic of funerals, once in 1988, and again in a BYU devotional in 1996. He clearly had some strong feelings on this topic.
Bishops should not yield the arrangement of meetings to members. They should not yield the arrangement for funerals or missionary farewells to families. It is not the proper order of things for members or families to expect to decide who will speak and for how long. Suggestions are in order, of course, but the bishop should not turn the meeting over to them. We are worried about the drift that is occuring in our meetings.
Funerals could and should be the most spiritually impressive. They are becoming informal family reunions in front of ward members. Often the Spirit is repulsed by humorous experiences or jokes when the time could be devoted to teaching the things of the Spirit, even the sacred things.
I still hold the hope that our heavenly parents have a great sense of humor. It doesn’t take much observation of humanity to bolster that hope.When the family insists that several family members speak in a funeral, we hear about the deceased instead of the Atonement, the Resurrection, and the comforting promises revealed in the scriptures. Now it’s all right to have a family member speak at a funeral, but if they do, their remarks should be in keeping with the spirit of the meeting.
I have told my Brethren in that day when my funeral is held, if any of them who speak talk about me, I will raise up and correct them. The gospel is to be preached.
I know of no meeting where the congregation is in a better state of readiness to receive revelation and inspiration from a speaker than they are at a funeral. This privilege is being taken away from us because we don’t understand the order of things–the unwritten order of things–that relates to the administration of the Church and the reception of the Spirit.
Really? A funeral? I rather think that non-members and inactives would be put off by the lack of respect to the deceased and the grieving family. It seems insensitive. Isn’t family supposed to come first? Elsewhere, Pres. Packer said:
Families are not tools to staff the Church; the Church is a tool to serve families. Don’t over-burden families!
What is your experience? Given the fact that these talks are 27 years old and 19 years old (and the second was only a BYU address), I am curious – it seems to be BKP’s opinion more than church policy based on its execution. Are these instructions being carried out? (I don’t attend enough funerals to know the current trends, but the last one I went to was mostly funny and touching stories about the deceased with maybe a church talk, but I’m pretty sure I tuned it out).
But I’m not going to threaten anyone with “rising up” out of my casket if these orders are not followed. That just seems churlish. When I die, I plan to stay reliably dead, at least for the duration of the funeral.
Wheat & Tares 
The current handbook basically echoes what Pres. Packer has said: funerals should be gospel focused, are teaching opportunities, etc.
Depending on the circumstances, if I encountered a priesthood leader who took that to an extreme I would likely hold the funeral someplace other than the church. The bishop would be invited as a guest but it would no longer be a “church meeting” within his purview.
Thanks for writing this. I have never been to a funeral where these instructions have been carried out because they are, in a word, heartless. They will not be followed at this funeral because everyone else knows better.
Maybe it isn’t the same in the Mormon corridor, but where I live this is either ignored or unknown by the bishops and they are much more worried if THEY are asked to speak.
He keeps calling funerals meetings, as if they were in the same order as sacrament meetings or elders quorum meetings. Funerals are not meetings! What he is referring to funerals is actually only part of the funeral service known as the tribute. That’s the part where everyone gathers in the church to pay tribute to the deceased. It’s not a meeting, it’s a tribute!
I think people read the handbook instructions, and President Packer’s thoughts, too narrowly. I think he was referring to certain funeral practices where the funeral was turning into a sideshow. The bottom line is that if the family wants the bishop to conduct and hold it at a chapel, then they are essentially making it a church meeting, which triggers church leadership, presiding officer, etc. If they don’t feel like they want to give up that control, there’s nothing wrong with holding the funeral elsewhere. I personally haven’t run into any local leaders who haven’t bent over backwards to accommodate the desires of the family. There’s usually some type of eulogy, a talk about the deceased with some anecdotes, then a concluding talk that is on the plan of salvation, with some humor sprinkled throughout. The handbook doesn’t exclude tributes to the deceased, but doesn’t want that to be the predominate focus of the service.
President Packer’s vocabulary shows where he goes astray. A funeral is no more a meeting than a birthday party is a meeting. This is the perfect example of someone in authority riding their personal hobby horse and portraying it as the will of God. And I say that as an admirer of Elder Packer and not one of the internet hordes who loathe him.
“I personally haven’t run into any local leaders who haven’t bent over backwards to accommodate the desires of the family.” Nor have I, but I have heard from a few friends, not just in the Mormon corridor, who said their bishops held steadfastly to the manual, refusing to yield to the family’s wishes. I suppose my opinion is that if I encountered that, I would change the location.
This is a lovely post, raising the issue of just who the funeral is for.
Whilst I agree that the funeral is largely for the living, I have met families where the lack of direction by the deceased has led to family disagreements that have taken many years to be healed.That has made me think again about specifying my own wishes, leaving my loved ones with one less thing to fall out over at a very stressful time.
I’m sure this is a stupid question, but who else can run a funeral? I’m in the UK, but would be interested to know who else can do it anywhere.
hwc, my grandparents funerals (they were not church members) were held at the local crematorium with family members conducting the service. My Dad also conducted the service at the crematorium for his sister (a long time less active member).
I don’t know that there are as many places to hold funerals as weddings, but I don’t think there are any regulations regarding who can conduct a funeral service.
Pres. Packer’s counsel on funerals is, in most cases, wisely ignored. I suspect that his family and fellow church leaders, wanting to pay their respects to him, will likewise choose to ignore it at his own funeral.
I’ve always been a bit uneasy about Mormon funerals. I fully expect them to be religious, but when they’re little more than a revamped 1st discussion, I get a little uncomfortable…. Not to mention the way too casual pot-luck afterwards.
I personally know the pain caused by a zealous bishop following Elder Packer’s instructions. The bishop arrived at our home shortly after my mother died of a difficult fight with cancer. Her body was still warm, and he came not to console, to grieve, but to “take charge” of the funeral administration. He wanted personally to speak (although he only knew mother for a few months and they weren’t close). He also wanted to assign his leadership to speak who were not close or even kind to her. We shared our wishes for family to speak and he disagreed. He grudgingly allowed one speaker, if we agreed to submit the talk ahead of time for approval and we compromised by allowing some of his speaker choices. That very day, he threatened to not allow us the use of the church building, leaving us the only option of the expensive funeral home which only seated 30 people. We were crushed. My mother, a former RS president and faithful lifelong member was going to be denied the use if the church she spent her life devoted to…the building she helped raise money to build, that she lovingly cleaned, decorated, that she raised her family and worshipped in for 40 years. Perhaps we couldn’t be trusted…children who were all RMs, all temple married, all currently serving in callings. The bishop was new to the ward and didn’t know us. It caused tremendous pain and stress in our family at a very sad time. Blessedly, he was called away for work on the day of the funeral and his appointed presiding priesthood member blessedly knew that most lds funerals don’t follow the Packer model and turned it over to us, offering any help that was needed. I hope elder packer’s wishes will be followed with exactness at his funeral. If that’s what he wanted, let him have it that way. I personally found more beauty in seeing the plan if salvation unfold in the life story of a daughter of heavenly parents, progressing as a real-life example, than any theoretical or philosophical combination of scripture composed in another forgettable meeting lesson. This entire mortal existence, even the Savior’s sacrifice was about each person and their story, not about some abstract order or philosophy. We should celebrate Christ and the plan if salvation working in and through our funny, tearful, painful, joyous, difficult, blessed lives…our one-of-a-kind miraculous lives, not in a manual.
IDIAT said ” The handbook doesn’t exclude tributes to the deceased, but doesn’t want that to be the predominate focus of the service.”
Sorry, but I laughed out loud at this. What other reason are you at a funeral if not to pay tribute to the deceased? If the person didn’t die, you wouldn’t have the funeral (meeting?) anyway. Its not like the funeral is taking away from Sacrament Meeting. It’s sole purpose is to honor the dead and console the family.
Surf40 – I attend a funeral to pay respect to the deceased, to mourn with those who mourn. I also attend because it reminds me of my mortality and how things in this life are temporary. I’m reminded of the atonement and resurrection. That’s just me. If you attend only to honor the dead and console the family, that’s your prerogative. To repeat, if you don’t agree with the church’s approach, you’re more than welcome to hold the funeral elsewhere and do anything you like. Mortimer – sorry for your bad experience. It doesn’t sound like he followed Elder Packer’s advice or the handbook, where funerals are addressed in Handbook 2, section 18.6, especially 18.6.4. Some people handle death and it’s associated stresses well; some don’t. Sounds like your bishop didn’t.
I think he was addressing a few pressing issues of the time, as well as bringing up some good recommendations on what a funeral should be for (in his opinion).
Absolutely agree that a funeral should not be an added stress for the family, but that shouldn’t mean barring them from any input. I also agree it shouldn’t be used as an opportunity to gather and gossip as a family. It’s a time to contemplate and grieve together.
I think a good rule of thumb should be, “What would the deceased want if they were there?” Would they be deeply embarrassed at the adulation? Would they want a chance to talk to everyone about what’s next in their life? Would they want a roast?
Would they have preferred you paid a little more attention to them while they were alive?
Death is a part of life; why do we treat it like it’s a surprise, avoiding even thinking about it and leaving others to clean up our mess? I’m sure Pres Packer will get everything he wanted for his funeral, including people not talking about him. Have you given any thought to what you want for yours?
Me, I want a wake. I want people high on whatever suits them, singing, and enjoying themselves. My body could set in the corner and soak up the ambiance. I think I’d also do cremation, with a nice stick with a hot dog on the end, a hat check ticket (to notify people that I’m coming back for my checked items), and a sign reading “I aten’t dead”
I’ve see people opt for a simple graveside service rather than a more formal funeral in a chapel.
Part of the adulation at the funeral isn’t just to glorify the deceased, but to recognize the impact that the deceased had on the lives of others. It’s a time when family, neighbors, churchmembers, work colleagues, and longtime friends can come together and formally recognize someone they respected. If the deceased had religious beliefs that informed their views of the afterlife, it makes sense those beliefs would be shared at some point during the meeting.
There has been more emphasis in recent years about recording personal life histories of living and departed individuals in addition to ensuring they receive all required temple ordinances. People are understood to have value beyond a name and checked boxes. Perhaps an overzealous bishop could be reminded of this.
I want a solemn LDS Funeral with appropriate talks about death and the resurrection. I’d rather be wearing my dress uniform than the temple clothing (have the articles folded up neatly at the foot of the casket), but I’ll give in on this one. No personal tributes…the Church is for glorifying He whose Church it is, NOT yours truly.
For the wake or reception, I’d rather have one swinging party! Time for sadness, it is not…rather, celebrate, you should, on a life well-lived, and the legacy left behind. Let those that want to drink do so…I’m sure my bro-in-law will mix up a 33 gal “Roughneck” (freshly bought and rinsed NOT ‘used’) full of “jungle juice” and keep the party attendees well-lubricated.
And if I did have the resources, I’d have my corpus indilectus taken out to sea as befits any sailor…have bought a old tug…and lower my body some 100 fathoms (600 feet) down, weighed by a…W88 thermonuclear warhead. Set the yield to the full 475kt, and be at least 10 miles away when it goes off. Put the video of the event on YouTube, with the header, “This is how you go out…with a bang!”
Re: Packer funeral. I hope that the nitwits and naysayers who for some inexplicable reason label the late Apostle as a ‘hater’ or want to crayon devil’s horns and fangs on his image will just stay away and not turn the funeral into a public spectacle. If they did, it’d very much generate negative publicity…for THEM…but I’m thinking of the family. Even those that didn’t care for things he said should remember that he was someone’s husband, father, grandfather, great-grandfather, uncle, cousin…etc…etc…etc. Funerals are more for the living, unless you expect the corpse to re-animate, get up and walk out, there’s nothing you can do for the deceased anymore.
Boy, I bet BKP was real fun at parties…
It depends on where one lives, who the Bishop is, who Stake President is, etc.
When my father passed away he was First Councillor in the Bishopric. The Bishop let my mother have her wishes, but the Stake President was over zealous in doing what Packer said.
A Church of God Minister who was good friends with my father gave the life story and spoke of their friendship and shared a story or two. We had songs from my father’s childhood….he was raised Methodist in the deep south, converted to LDS, but he still enjoyed nonLDS gospel music. My father’s one surviving brother (not LDS) cried when we sang those old gospel songs that they grew up with. My Uncle thanked us for singing those songs.
We spoke of the Atonement, Temples, etc.
The Stake President spoke last, unbeknownst to us, and ruined the whole thing. I am not ashamed of LDS doctrine. But a funeral is for the family. The church is there for support. The funeral did convey LDS doctrines, but not enough for the Stake President.
I had no idea Packer had said these things about funerals. I found out after my father’s funeral.
On another note, some of my ex family are no longer LDS and caused problems with the Bishop and my mother. They were very rude to the Bishop and the Bishop handled it with grace and class.
I liked Packer, but he was too serious about everything. Sometimes one has to lighten up. I like to think God and Christ have a sense of humor.
Recently, I attended the funeral of a very young wife who died after a long illness. Surprisingly, her husband wanted to speak at her funeral. Everything he said was infused with love, faith, devotion, and spirit. He shared their experiences together before her death. He shared his testimony and his faith. All of it was so lovely, so intimate, so spirit-filled.
The funeral should have ended then. But no. The bishop got up and blabbered on and on. It felt like a boring Sunday school lesson, full of sterile doctrine and recitations of prescribed scripture. Ugh. It was terrible. I wanted to tell him to shut it.
I strongly disagree with the “take it or leave it” attitude. Who paid for the church building if not the members with their tithing? The church corporation may own the deed, but it was bought by the sacrifice of the members. To claim that they somehow don’t have any ownership in that building, and that if they don’t like the church rules for funerals they need to go pay to hold the funeral somewhere else instead of being free riders, is heartless and ignorant. The attitude is the result of too many leaders believing they were called to serve their higher ups instead of the members.
And one more thing. I have already told my husband that I want my funeral anywhere but in an LDS chapel. I am going to leave this life without some male authority presiding over me 😉
IDIAT,
Sorry, no, I do not think the solution is to be better at following the handbook . . . that all the pain I described could be avoided if we just drilled down to the most detailed lines and paragraphs of the CHI and follow them more precisely. You’re assuming that the CHI and everything Elder Packer said in a BYU address in the 70’s is canonized scripture for the entire church, perfect and timeless. No. It’s not. It’s an imperfect set of changing policies and procedures.
We don’t need more ‘leadership training’ or more rules to refine the rules. The problem with my bishop occurred because he was trying to follow the rule book with mathematical precision. It gave him too much to juggle. Consequently, ‘mourning’ and ‘remembering the departed’ shuffled down to the bottom of the list. He was transformed from a servant into an enforcer. Controlling and turning the service into a missionary meeting became more important than just remembering the beautiful person that was my mom. Until it happens to you, I cannot describe how offensive it is.
As a matter of fact, if his goal was to make her death a missionary moment, turning us away was NOT viewed well by our community (who knew her to have sacrificed for the church and loved it with her whole heart). We tried to hide it, but they knew we were being rejected and saw the strictness of the whole debacle. Also, non-members who come to pay their respects should NOT be bombarded with proselytizing! As the spirit prompts, let it come naturally, with sincerity and authenticity, interwoven with our lives. Natural testimonies have the most impact anyway. The focus should still be on the departed and the family.
The solution, IMHO is to reduce the rules, to stop being so darn Pharisaical- to stop counting the number of steps taken on the sabbath, to stop fretting about the minutia of the rule book and the unwritten rule book, and to simply- very simply focus on the two great commandments and our baptismal covenant. Maybe we could just focus on helping each other instead of enforcing. It would be enough.
Mortimer: “everything Elder Packer said in a BYU address in the 70’s” Not disagreeing with you, but I did want to clarify that these addresses were in 1988 and 1996, not the 70s.
i plan to have my casket by the back row of the chapel where i sit when i attend meetings just like my father in law did that is all
Well, since you asked:
–yes on the organ donor. Also, tissue, etc. I am a little squeamish about med students dropping my body parts in a bucket, though, so don’t send me to universities or colleges.
–no on the cremation. Have always felt a strong affinity for the Jewish people who experienced the Holocaust; consequently, cremation feels disrespectful to me. If others want to, why not?
–also, no mausoleaums (sp?)/crypts. They seem like file cabinets for dead bodies to me. Just put me in the ground in an wood box so the worms can eat me. Of course, I’d like a nice blankie to keep my bones warm, and toss in a good book and some Doritos, a cherry coke, and some chocolate.
–although I wear the g’s in this life, do not bury me in temple clothes. They irritate me in this life; I can’t imagine how they’d affect me in the next. Plus, they look like something from a creepy 19th century funeral anyway. Just dress me in jeans and a tie-dye t-shirt.
–yes on the funeral in an LDS building. I paid my tithing in this life, I’d like my loved ones to not be saddled with funeral home costs. However, only if the bishop is cool about letting my family plan the funeral (that will be my last spin on leadership roulette. I hope.)
–Absolutely no sacrament meeting tone-age. Like my birthdays, my funeral is my day; celebrate ME. Like Tom Sawyer, I want to listen in to all the nice things people have to say about me. Because the LDS religion was such a big part of my life (and presumably, in the next life), I suspect it will come up in the funeral. I think talking about the doctrine is fine, but only as a way to provide comfort. This is not a chance for proselyting.
Mortimer 23 – exactly which part of the handbook instructions on funerals do you disagree with? Sure, we can throw out the handbooks. We can also throw out the scriptures and prophets and just leave it up to individuals to follow the two great commandments. Or, we can not throw the baby out with the wash and examine what leaders are trying to convey. I know we’ll hear horror stories here, but I don’t believe the thousands of LDS funerals are all crappy.
IDIAT,
I’d revoke the unwritten order of things and revise the CHI re: funerals, allowing them to be family-led memorial services about the life and connection with the departed, not proselytizing meetings. I’ll concede that we need rule-makers at times, but after 180+ years, we as a church are still treating the members with one-size-fits-all-rules, essentially, the lower law. I wonder when we can get to the point where Brother Joseph’s idea of teaching the saints correct principles ANC letting them govern themselves will come into play. The brethren seem to distrust us as they fel a need to micro-manage so many pharasiacal details and impose uniform order. I suppose that with a 15 million member church, there isn’t much more that they can do, but this approach runs aground with several saints whose heart-breaking stories were shared here. I also will bet you that a memorial to the man Boyd k. will take place at his funeral and during this week of rememberence, showing that there ARE exceptions needed and the policy is dumb.
I don’t want any Bishop or ecclesiastical leader speaking at my funeral unless they’re close friends who share or are sympathetic with my heretical beliefs. And even then, those beliefs make up a small portion of my interests, so I’m probably best off avoiding an LDS funeral altogether. On the other hand, i sometimes think, I’ll be dead so what do I care?
With all due respect, Elder Packer was wrong. If this is the type of funeral he would like to have, then by all means, his family should honor those wishes. My father-in-law died this year. He was a great dancer and my daughter played a medley of old dance tunes at his funeral. She ended with “The Last Waltz” and there wasn’t a dry eye in the house. Not appropriate for sacrament meeting but very appropriate for my father-in-law’s ultimate “farewell.”
I attended the funeral of a young boy at an LDS chapel recently so this interesting post touched a nerve with me. The boy was unexpectedly killed in a tragic auto/pedestrian accident and this event has been devastating to the family and the community.
Fortunately, the bishop allowed the family to select a number of family members (uncles/aunts/grandmas) to speak and provide appropriate tribute and reflections on the short life of this boy. The bishop even allowed a video tribute of the boy to be played during the funeral (it brought a lot of tears to see videos and pictures of this happy boy alive). The funeral ended by a very touching and sensitive ‘talk’ by the bishop. The bishop emphasized the best of our LDS doctrine : our responsibility to mourn with those that mourn, the role of the Holy Ghost in comforting the grieving, the hope we hold in the future because of the atonement of Jesus Christ (resurrection), and the eternal nature of families. I am sure everyone who attended, member and non-member alike, were touched and uplifted by his remarks.
It is hard for me to imagine a bishop giving an insensitive dry missionary discussion at a funeral. Based on comments in this thread it seems this is happening. My experience, however, suggests that such insensitive talks are the exception rather than the rule. This recent funeral I attended portrayed the best of our LDS culture and doctrine. There was plenty of love and support of the family (lots of volunteers helping with food, support of kids, driving, hosting, etc.). The most positive uplifting aspects of our doctrine were presented in a sensitive way (i.e., not with the intent of exploiting the situation for a missionary moment). Most importantly to me, everyone who attended had a good feeling at the funeral and left being glad they attended.
My brother was killed in a car crash 9 years ago. He was a television personality in central California, and had just moved to Utah at the time of his death. We had a memorial service in California, as well as a funeral in Utah. Many non-LDS attended the memorial service in California. It was a wonderful service, until the last speaker. Because leaders knew the funeral service was covered by the media (who asked and were denied cameras during the service), they asked the local mission president to give the last talk on the plan of salvation. His talk was without question, the most boring part of the service. He did not know my brother, and it just seemed quite out of place.
My wife’s cousin was killed a few years ago in a car crash as well. The deceased had been raised in a prominent LDS family. He had started smoking, and not feeling welcome in the LDS Church, has started attending a local Baptist church at the time of his death. Because he came from a large family, the local Baptist church did not have room to accommodate the large family and friends who planned to attend, so the pastor asked to hold the service in an LDS Stake Center. It was truly an unusual service, because the pastor presided over the service. The pastor gave an interesting service, the deceased’s sisters sang a musical number, and it was a hybrid Baptist/Mormon service. At the graveside, the pastor asked everyone to sing Amazing Grace. I think he was a bit surprised that few people knew the words to the song after the first line. It was definitely a funeral I’ll never forget.
While I’m on the subject of unusual funerals, I should share one from my mission. I had just transferred into an area. My companion had been teaching a woman, and she learned her brother had been murdered. This brother was well-known to the police and wasn’t exactly an upstanding citizen. We arrived at the funeral early, and someone came up to us and asked if we were “the preacher”, wondering if we were in charge of the funeral. We weren’t.
Besides being the only white guys at a black funeral, the service was unusual because of what the preacher did say. He basically admonished everyone to not live the life that the deceased had lived. It was an object lesson that when you sow a bad life, that’s what you get. It was apparent that the preacher didn’t know the deceased either and was aware of the poor choices of the deceased.
As we exited the funeral, the ward mission leader who happened to be a cop, invited us to get out of the cold and sit in his patrol car. They were videotaping the people leaving the funeral, trying to figure out if the murderer had attended. (Apparently that is something some murderers do.) They did catch the murderer a few months later, and discovered he was insane.
Yeah, that was the weirdest funeral ever.
#30 – ANY FUNeral is for the living, so if it makes a difference to you how your loved ones and friends remember your farewell, then make your last instructions a part of your will or trust.
#31 – I see no reason that Grandpa’s sendoff shouldn’t reflect his wishes and how folks remembered him.
#33,34 – I’m sorry that the funerals of your beloved relatives had to be marred by clods. It’s one thing to ALLUDE to gospel principles relevant to death or, more preferably, to some of the more prominent anecdotes of the deceased’s life (as long as they are uplifting and speak well of the one in the casket, of course!), it’s another to go whole-hog on teaching a lesson. Save it for Sacrament or Sunday School, please. At least one result, thankfully, of that ‘hood’ funeral was your own shortly after, though I’m sure that wasn’t a likely outcome. Cops having a funeral under service. I admit I’d have quietly tip-toed, backward, outta there, and, once on my bike, started pedaling furiously!
For those who think me crazy b/c, like George Carlin, I don’t want merely to be cremated, I want to be ‘blown up’, and use the most powerful missile-delivered warhead in the inventory (the B83 can deliver up to 1.2Mt, and like all other two-stage thermonuclear devices in US service, is ‘dial-a-yield’). Keep in mind that ‘nukes don’t leave holes in the water’. The fireball is of a much different characteristic as essentially the sea water is boiled into steam, and is much smaller than if detonated in the atmosphere. It does give any nuclear mine quite the punch, though. Also, there’d be very little if any fallout as the sea fairly much contains the explosion and the radioactive fission products or dispersed, un-fissioned weapons-grade material. And I’d pick a location well out of the shipping lanes (300 nm SSW of the Farallon Islands comes to mind). But…I doubt I’ll ever have the resources, money and connections to pull off that kinda stunt.
Heretic:
I meant WASN’T your own, sorry…
I found an interesting video of an “LDS” funeral in Africa. The video was made by a North American senior missionary couple participating in the funeral. This doesn’t seem to follow the standard LDS style of funeral. I would like to have a funeral like this.
http://happiestfacesonearth.org/?p=808
I found a video of an “LDS” funeral in Africa. It was made by a senior LDS missionary couple serving in the area. I don’t think they followed the church handbook of instructions. This is how I would like my funeral.
http://happiestfacesonearth.org/?p=808
I agree,way should we always have to be so stoic.I was a Bishop for almost 7 yrs. I did a number of funerals and felt that I was to give hope to the family.
#38,39 – mucho thanks. You gave this cantankerous swabbie something to sleep peacefully with. Methinks our African brothers and sisters will not only blossom in numbers and strengthen in the Lord, they’ll teach us a thing or three…probably starting with humility. When it’s my time to retire from grubbing for a living and embark more on the Lord’s work as that missionary couple, I’ll be blessed to be as fortunate as they to labor among such choice spirits.
“What do you think? Should funerals be 100% religious with no mention of the deceased as an individual, only as an example of the Plan of Salvation in action?”
H*ll, no! Funerals are for families to cope with the death of a loved one. Religions absolutely should not co-opt funerals so that they can get more tithing money from new converts.
I don’t have problems with bringing God into funerals, and preaching the atonement and resurrection as a form of comforting the family, telling them that they will see their loved one again. But using it as a tool to increase the wealth and pride of the Church and Brethren. No. Just no. They are wealthy enough. They have pride enough.
“Is it best for grieving families to hold funerals in their homes or away from the church if they want to cherish and honor the specific memory of their loved ones?”
This is what I intend. I told my children that I want my funeral to be a going away party. I intend to leave instructions about what songs I want sung (“inappropriate for the chapel” songs like “You’ll Never Walk Alone” from Carousel), and that no bishop is allowed to give “closing comments.” I don’t know where the funeral will be, but I would like it at someone’s home or in their garden (if I die at the right time of year).
“What is your experience?”
My experience is that there is a talk on the life of the person, a talk on the plan of salvation, geared to comfort those who grieve, then the bishop gets up to give the required “words” the Church asks of him.
In between, there are a few songs. At one funeral I went to, people were invited to come up and say a few words about the deceased.
Thus far, in my experience, Packer has not gotten his wish of funerals ignoring the deceased and focusing on the Church. In fact, his own funeral was lavish in his praise – so even he did not get ignored at his own funeral.
“make sure I look good, but keep expenses down. Let’s not beggar my posterity in the process.”
I intend to be cremated. It costs less, and my ashes can be scattered over my herb garden (supposing I have one). And, I understand, one can avoid being embalmed, which is an added cost. A homemade, wooden, casket would be great if I knew someone who could make it.
“I’m sure this is a stupid question, but who else can run a funeral? I’m in the UK, but would be interested to know who else can do it anywhere”
Anyone. A funeral director (mortician), any religious leader, even a friend or family member can do it. In conjunction with the mortician, as they know the legal ins and outs of the burial and preparation of the body – but the actual funeral can be directed/under the direction of anyone. At least here, in the U.S.
“The funeral should have ended then. But no. The bishop got up and blabbered on and on. It felt like a boring Sunday school lesson, full of sterile doctrine and recitations of prescribed scripture. Ugh. It was terrible. I wanted to tell him to shut it.”
I’ve been to too many funerals like that. The bishop’s “remarks” are not needed and I have seen a bishop say things that I knew would alienate the family from Church. Boring at best, alienating at worst. With very, very, very few exceptions (one was the latest funeral I attended. Though part of the talk was sterile doctrine, the bishop knew the lady liked music and sang a song for her. “Burst into song” is what I think of, even though he told us he was going to sing. Anyone who can sing a capella and stay on tune, sings well in my book).
I’ve attended one of these “ideal funerals” in the mission field (literally- I was a missionary ), although it was a graveside service, and it was super bizarre. An old bishop gave a talk on the plan of salvation, during which some guy fainted in the 90+-degree Kansas. The talk promptly ended. Also, another old bishop dedicated the grave and kept switching his mind about whether the deceased would rise in the first or second resurrection.
I attribute my love for black comedy to this funeral.