RJ.org News and Views of Reform Jews
 
About | Submissions | Contact
topics

  • Torah
  • Defining Reform
  • Jewish History
  • Jewish Living
  • Community
  • Social Action
  • Israel/World
  • Holidays
  • Shabbat
  • Lifecycle
  • Youth & Family
  • College Life
  • Books
  • Ask The Rabbi

    Get Jewish World News in your inbox

    BOOKS & MUSIC

    Inside Intermarriage
    Inside Intermarriage:
    A Christian Partner's Perspective on Raising a Jewish Family

    by Jim Keen
    (URJ Press)

    The Torah
    The Torah: A Women's Commentary
    (URJ Press)

    Union for Reform Judaism

    Funeral Fiascos: Should Jews Rethink How We Honor the Dead?
    July 21, 2010
    By Rabbi Eric Yoffie | Lifecycle (15 comments)

    by Rabbi Eric Yoffie
    Originally posted on the
    Huffington Post

    eric-yoffie-head.jpgA friend of mine recently attended the funeral of someone he had known for many years. About a dozen people got up to speak. Most of them spoke badly. Often the eulogizers ended up talking not about the deceased but about themselves. When the funeral was finally over, at least an hour and a half later, my friend was frustrated and angry. "I cared about this person," he said, "and she deserved a more fitting farewell."

    Jewish funerals have changed in the last several decades, and not always for the better. Some of the changes were both understandable and welcome. At a time when all ritual was becoming less formal, Jews wanted funeral services that were more personal, intimate, and heartfelt. Therefore, when a death occurred, instead of calling on the rabbi for the eulogy, a close member of the family -- perhaps a child or sibling of the deceased -- was sometimes called upon to say a few words.

    So far, so good. I have frequently been deeply moved by the eloquence of a daughter speaking of her father at his funeral, sharing memories and experiences with power and immediacy that no other speaker could possibly provide. A family member or close friend is often in a position to do what a member of the clergy cannot.

    But once this door was opened, a variety of difficulties came into play. Family members discovered that when a close relative died, there was an expectation that one of them would speak -- even if they had no desire to do so. Since Jewish burials take place as soon as possible after the death, individuals still reeling from the impact of a loss find themselves under pressure -- real or self-imposed -- to talk at the funeral and represent the family to the community. Some refuse and feel guilty. Others agree but find the task difficult and painful. Either way, an unfair burden is imposed on those who are in profound distress.

    Another problem -- delicate but unavoidable -- is that not everyone is suited to offer a eulogy at a funeral. The issue is not whether a mourner has public speaking experience or can give a polished talk; the absence of experience and polish is often an advantage. But someone who is uncomfortable in front of a group under favorable circumstances is likely to be completely overcome in the highly charged atmosphere of a funeral. The result may be a talk that is exceedingly emotional and barely coherent -- one in which the feelings of the speaker rather than the character of the deceased are primary.

    And finally the practice of having family members and friends speak at a funeral can quickly get out of hand. The spouse of the deceased, not certain whom to invite and afraid of leaving someone out, feels that all of her children, or perhaps even all of her grandchildren, should say something. Friends, seeing that other friends are participating, come forward and offer -- sometimes quite insistently -- to participate as well, and it is awkward to turn them down. Many end up sharing anecdotes that are more about themselves than about their late friend, and -- yes, it happens -- trying to outdo the other speakers. The result? A funeral like the one mentioned above that leaves the members of the congregation both uncomfortable and bored, shifting in their seats and surreptitiously looking at the watches. Most important, the closest relatives cannot help but sense what is happening, and they suffer as a result.

    As we know from Abraham's lament over Sarah and David's over Saul and Jonathan, the primary purpose of a eulogy -- in Hebrew, hesped -- is to praise the deceased. Whether one does so in simple, direct language or in elegant, poetic form, it is these words of praise -- spoken from the heart -- that help the mourners cope with their pain. Funeral services that are endless and multiple eulogies that are self-serving, inappropriate, or badly prepared dishonor the dead and deny the living the support and comfort that they deserve.

    Most funeral services are not like that, of course, and every rabbi that I know is exquisitely sensitive to the problems that I have mentioned. Nonetheless, I fear that cultural patterns are creating pressures that are hard to resist, and in the last few years I have attended far too many funerals that have left me distressed and even indignant rather than consoled. My fear is that if we do nothing, this sort of funeral will become the norm. Before that happens, let's give some thought to how we remember and honor the departed.

    print Print     email Email     comment Comment    

     

    Comments

    Mark Tasch said:

    Amen! The last funeral of a close friend that I attended included an invited eulogy that was well-prepared, well-delivered, largely self-referential, and interminable.

    Loren said:

    This brings to mind the funeral of my childhood rabbi, a "macher" in the Conservative movement. Since he taught homiletics, a number of people felt they had to speak.

    From what I heard it went on for quite a while. Although I was not there, I felt sorry for (and uncomfortable on behalf of) his widow and children.

    People need to get over themselves and remember what and whom a funeral is about.

    Jordan Friedman said:

    Well said. I agree. When both of my maternal grandparents died within weeks of each other, I was only 16. At both funerals, my relatives pressured me to get up and say something, but I simply felt I could not do it. So I didn't, but all of my cousins did. My entire extended family was furious with me, accusing me of disrespect, but the Rabbi assured me I was honoring my grandparents at least as much as those who spoke. She was very right--if I had tried to force myself to speak, it would not have been very coherent, since I had trouble speaking in front of lots of people at that age. My mental outpouring of pleasant, loving thoughts and prayers was more than adequate, I'm sure. Too bad my family saw it differently.

    Deborah Rudy said:

    Although I agree with many of Rabbi Yoffe's points, sometimes the choice to have eulogies delivered by lay persons speaks to the relationship and connection that the family of the deceased may or may not feel with the rabbi officiating. Where there is a feeling of trust and intimacy with the officiant, the need to have others join in eulogizing is less pressing. It is not simply about hubris on the part of friends and family members. Establishing the necessary level of comfort and confidence is part of the responsibility of the clergy.

    Cantor Judi Rowland said:

    I could not agree more with Rabbi Yoffie. Let me add that when family members give the eulogies there is a lack of Jewish context. When I officiate at a funeral I explain that what clergy (not just rabbis) do in a eulogy is give comfort and meaning to the events of a person's life, not just list them. If we are good at what we do we use text and Jewish teaching to elevate the moment. We can soften the faults of the deceased and emphasize their greatest moments and achievements. We can use the tools that Judaism gives us for creating a holy moment.

    Of course, family members are best at telling a story about one time - one encounter - that I could not do justice to. So I strongly encourage that these stories be told in the Shiva house, where the family, sitting in the living room, or around the table, can share their remembrances freely and often. In fact, if I officiate at the first night of shiva, I always take time before Kaddish to encourage those in attendance to share their stories.

    Betty Moses said:

    A funeral is a very personal event. Most times it is very difficult for a family member to speak. If the family feels something must be said, they can ask a close friend or relative to say a few words.However, when people start with the deceased's history eg. where they worked & for how many years, what they did for a living, what their interests were etc, it becomes a sham. People have come to the funeral because they knew the person & to pay their respects, not to hear a resume or life achievements. Most times they already know & what does it really matter to those who don't know ? They have probably come to respect the family they know. I feel eulogies should be short & sweet & not a life history.

    Irene Palnick said:

    I agree with Rabbi Yoffie. I am posing an important issue. If non clergy speak at a funeral should the speech be reviewed by the rabbi or a member of the family. I am referring to a family funeral where the children wanted to speak. The daughter of the deceased had a grudge against her father and her speech contained all her past grievances- like her father had had affairs-was an alcoholic- was abusive-all exaggerated. Luckily the Rabbi looked at the talks and refused to let her talk- since the deceased could not reply to these accusations. As a consequence none of the children spoke and the funeral and shiva were full of bad feelings and arguments.

    I would appreciate your feedback.

    Mary Hofmann said:

    While it is fortunate the eulogies at the funerals I've attended have been, for the most part, heartfelt and appropriate, there are always those dreadful moments when the person officiating asks if anyone else would like to speak. Sadly, the people who cannot bear the tension and feel forced to respond are often those least prepared to do so. I wonder if there isn't a way to close the comments without the mourners feeling cut off -- or obligated to speak.

    Mike Morgulis said:

    Shortly before my mother passed, Rabbi Goldfarb gathered my father, my brothers and myself for a meeting. He suggested that only one person speak, that the eulogy not exceed 5 minutes, and he gave explicit instructions that it be about our Mum, not about us. He also suggested that our father be spared the task of speaking. We agreed that our younger brother speak, while we would all pen the words. While there was some angst about what to include, what not to include, Dad edited it and Peter delivered it flawlessly. During the service, Rabbi Goldfarb referred to the eulogy as 'erudite' and he added briefly to it some very heartfelt words as he was close to my Mum and remains close with our Dad. Everyone who came to the Shiva house remarked at how well Peter spoke and how deeply moving the eulogy was.
    A bit of clear, concise instruction went a very long way. A belated and heartfelt thanks to Rabbi Ed Goldfarb for his guidance.

    Jeffrey Stiffman said:

    Bravo Eric Yoffie! The long, drawn-out funerals have become the new plague. I have tried to suggest to families that they collaborate on one eulogy. Sometiems it works. Sometimes not. A funeral for a Conservative Rabbinical colleague here lasted 2 1/2 hours. I have had too many run for an hour or more. Perhaps it is time that either local councils or groups of rabbis and lay leaders come together to draw up guidlines for communities.

    Larry Kaufman said:

    How long do any of us remember what was said at any funeral? At my mother's funeral, some 28 years ago, we requested that there be no eulogy. At the graveside funeral, the rabbi (who had known my mother well) told those assembled of our request, and then added, "I am very relieved, for I could not possibly have done her justice."

    Those few words said more than the rabbi, or any of the family, could have told in twenty minutes, and have stayed with me more than any history or geneology would have.

    Misnogid said:

    The meanest man in town has died. Everyone turns out for the funeral, but no one can think of anything good to say in a eulogy. Finally, one old man steps forward and says, Let me say something nice about the deceased. I was acquainted with his father, and compared to his father, he was a tzaddik (saint).

    Aryeh Lev said:

    Presumably a family can opt to have a funeral without a rabbi. But if they want a rabbi, it indicates they have at least some respect for the rabbi's authority (as well as for the rabbi's schedule). Ergo, I place at least part of the blame for the situation described by Rabbi Yoffie, and amplified by the various commenters, on the rabbi.

    1. The rabbi needs to make sure the mourners know who's in charge of this religious ceremony.
    2. The rabbi needs to be sensitive to the needs of the mourners, including removing the pressure of speaking from anyone who doesn't want to, and giving guidance and guidelines to family eulogists.
    3. The rabbi needs to tell the family, at such and such a time, I'm leaving with the casket for the cemetery, and I sure hope you'll be joining me.
    4. The rabbi needs to make sure the funeral director understands the rules, and helps manage mourners' expectations. Nobody else's expectations matter.

    Dan Isard said:

    To This On-Line Community,

    I an Jewish and an consultant to the funeral profession but not theologically trained as many of you are. While many of your comments are focused upon the issues of Jewish funerals, the issues you are discussing are about the clergy and the roles of non-clergy in a funeral. These concerns transcend any religious label and affect all clergy and all mourners.

    First of all, can we all agree that the objective should be to make funerals more meaningful for the mourners? I see an increasing use of direct burials and direct cremations taking place. With these events, the community of mourners is never even brought together.

    As to the issue of eulogy by non-clergy, we can all point to extremes. There are even extremes where the clergy made misstatements inadvertently. Anytime a family member or dear friend wants to express themselves, the clergy, funeral director or others can help them with their comments and delivery.

    As to "respecting the time of the clergy", I must take exception. There are times when time must stand still and the needs of those suffering a loss or in pain must cause the professional to be prepared with more time in their busy schedules.

    I for one, think it is better to have a person give a weak eulogy, then to not have a funeral. We must make a funeral meaningful for the community of mourners. We need to encourage more use video to capture the memories. We need to find modern ways to capture the outpouring of emotions and not be limited to what we interpret rituals and laws to limit. That is a greater threat to the future of funerals than any one unprepared speaker.

    Rabbi Eric Yoffie said:

    My thanks to all for their insights. I am in agreement with most of the comments.

    Responses here, on Huffington Post, and in private have focused largely on the role of the rabbi. Some assumed that I was downplaying or discouraging rabbinic participation; some assumed the opposite. In fact, comments by the rabbi are, in my view, virtually always welcome--unless, perhaps, there is a history of enmity between the rabbi and the deceased. Rabbis know how to speak at funerals. They know how to refocus or reshape comments that might have been problematic. They understand the goal of a eulogy. In my experience, funerals that "work" -- that provide comfort to the bereaved and honor the deceased -- are almost always funerals in which the rabbi or cantor has a major role. In addition, a family member or friend may speak, as my post indicates, when it is appropriate for them to do so. The keys for me are: NOT TOO MANY SPEAKERS, a focus on praising the dead and consoling the living, and not pushing those who are reluctant to speak to do what may be painful for them.

    Post a comment