Letters to the Editor

Funeral vs. Funereal

Dear Editor: While there always seem to be ongoing debates and dissents regarding liturgy, I wish to give our diocese credit where it is outstandingly due. During the past two weeks, I had the unusual experience of being closely involved in three funerals. In each instance, there was a close community of mourners with a history of identification with the Church.

The first followed the death of a dear friend’s adult son. It was the smallest of the gatherings and for me, the saddest. Yet this “ordinary” Mass of the Resurrection was truly that: the words of the liturgy were perfect but the music especially so. The aching hearts that had come together that morning appeared to have been gotten ”en-courage-ment” to step forward afterwards, nourished with the Eucharist in the entirety of the sacrament.

The other two occasions occurred in other dioceses and were funereal. I felt that the mourners were made to suffer even further because of heavy, plodding dirges from antiquated church organs that threatened to suck the very air from our souls. To endure this when the Mass and music of the Resurrection can be such a gift to heavy hearts, felt like a veritable stone door to a hopelessly closed tomb.

For every time that the Brooklyn Diocese blesses our sorrow in this way, I give deep and heartfelt thanks.



One thought on “Funeral vs. Funereal

  1. How can an organ be antiquated? How can anything be antiquated? Do you have contempt for the people of the past? Is that in any way Christian?

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *