Thread: vicar shopping - funeral Board: Oblivion / Ship of Fools.


To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=70;t=025010
Posted by JJSchmidt (# 16864) on :
 
My grandmother has just died. She was active within her community and had lived in the same place for all of her long life.

Until a few years ago she also went to church every week.

Unfortunately the current vicar of her local church is someone whom she did not like. As I understand it the vicar had also managed to alienate many of her friends who had gone away to another church a mile or so away. Her attitude however was that if she did not go there she would not go anywhere.

We feel that it would be appropriate to hold the funeral in the local church in view of her connections with the community and the many people who might like to come.

However unfortunately the incumbent vicar is an absolute dealbreaker, in view of her very clear and well-stated views against him. There is no curate there.

I just wonder if anyone has any advice about how to deal with the situation given the strong bond that she had with her community and her clearly stated opposition to the vicar of the parish.
 
Posted by Bishops Finger (# 5430) on :
 
Assuming you're in the UK, is there a licensed Reader at the church who has permission to officiate at funerals? It doesn't have to be a priest......

Ian J.
 
Posted by Imersge Canfield (# 17431) on :
 
Please accept my condolences.

I wonder if the minister or churchwarden (or whoever at the office hour) would consent to the funeral being held in the church building ?

The yourself and / or her friends could pout together a simple service in tribute to her life; and any other elements you wish.

It is nt as daunting as it might seem; and could be very fruitful for you.

Hope this helps a bit. Do come back on here or pm if I can help.

Cross-posted with bishop

[ 07. January 2013, 14:24: Message edited by: Imersge Canfield ]
 
Posted by Spike (# 36) on :
 
A Reader who is licensed to do funerals can still only do so with the permission of his/her incumbent. Even if a priest is brought in from elsewhere, if the funeral is to take place in church, then the incumbant has to agree to it.
 
Posted by Zacchaeus (# 14454) on :
 
Unfortunately from your perpective, the incumbent has the right to say who takes services in their church. Even if there were a curate or reader, the final decicion is with the vicar.

This happened to a colleague of mine, their eldely relative got on well with the curate and requested the curate take the funeral. Parish priest was a touchy sort and felt slighted and insisted on taking the funeral themselves. There was nothing the family could do apart from take the funeral straight to the crem

You have no right to pick your own officiant, if the service takes place in a parish church the parish priest decides.

Neither in the Cof E can you pick any church for the service unless there is some sort of connection.
 
Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on :
 
Sounds like you may have to seek another venue for a service--a community hall, maybe. That way you might be able to find a reader or other leader who can do it.

Condolences for your loss.
 
Posted by Zacchaeus (# 14454) on :
 
I was assuming that JJSchmidt lived in England as they are CofE?

If that is the case Gramps49, then sadly it may be hard to find another venue for the funeral. As it is not common practice here and a community hall may recoil at the idea fo hosting a funeral.

MAybe a different denomination? Is there perhaps a methodist church locally?

Funeral Directors may be able to help in this, they will be used to all sorts of requests from familiies, sometimes they have access to chapels themselves.

As this vicar is unpopular with your Grandmother's generation then maybe some of them have had experience of gettign around using this vicar?


I hope you fine a solution..
 
Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :
 
One possibility is to approach the vicar in question and ask him to arrange for another priest. Unless he is entirely bizarre and egocentric, he will do this. And if he does not respond positively, call up the archdeacon to have him make the arrangement--- the purple sash and piping is to acknowledge their problem-solving role. It's hardly the first time.
 
Posted by JJSchmidt (# 16864) on :
 
Would the Archdeacon be appropriate rather than the Dean?
 
Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :
 
Generally, archdeacons deal with disciplinary and regulatory matters in their turf. Deans occupy themselves with the cathedral. Unless you meant rural/regional deans? For that, CoE folk would have more knowlede than I.
 
Posted by Zacchaeus (# 14454) on :
 
Augustine the Aleut, things might be arranged somewhat differently in Canada. But I can't see the archdeacons in the diocese I am in, getting involved in chosing an officiant for a funeral.

In fact they would not be able to do so, as the incumbent holds the license to officiate in that parish church and nobody can conduct worship there without the incumbent's permission.

The archdeacon would only be able to suggest that it might be pastorally sensitve to do so.

While most clergy I know, if requested would allow somebody else to conduct a funeral, it is normally for a reason such as the - clergy person is a friend of the deceased or their family, somthing like that. Not because we don't like you so while we want to use your church we don't want you there.

If this clergyperson is unpopular then the Funeral directors will have had experience of this before and what happened and would be a good place to start. Funeral directors are often good at putting things in the best way to get what the family wants.
 
Posted by Zacchaeus (# 14454) on :
 
I doubt this is something for the Rural Dean they might be able to have an informal chat with the vicar but they have no authority over them in this respect.

Rural deans would chair deanery synods, clergy chapters, oversee interregna, pastoral care of clergy, etc.

Overseeing the day to day in a different parish no...
 
Posted by seasick (# 48) on :
 
Do you have an alternative priest/officiant in mind? I did assist with one funeral where there had been some pastoral difficulties between the family and the local minister and because of my connections with the care home where the deceased had lived I had ministered to him and his family as he approached death. In that case I smoothed the ground with the minister in question and the Superintendent so that the family's wishes could be honoured. It may be that a conversation priest-to-priest could achieve the desired result. However, if the request is "anyone but the Vicar" then it may be rather more difficult.

[Votive] May your grandmother rest in peace.
 
Posted by Zacchaeus (# 14454) on :
 
What seasick says smakes sense, you need somebody who can softly, softly negotiate with the vicar on your behalf.

Nobody can force the vicar to let you have another officiant in his/her church, but maybe a third party who can deal with it in a gentle way might win the day.

Good luck
 
Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Augustine the Aleut:
One possibility is to approach the vicar in question and ask him to arrange for another priest. Unless he is entirely bizarre and egocentric, he will do this.
If next of kin wish to go to the parish church, this is probably the best first approach. It would take a particularly churlish and selfish incumbent not to say, 'fine, get your own priest and I'll okay it' - however reluctantly. It happens occasionally that one gets requests for other officiants anyway (friends of the family, past incumbents etc), it's not unheard of and not difficult to organise. However, if the incumbent is difficult, I'm not sure appealing to a higher authority is really going to help things.

I would've thought the funeral director would have some experience of options for a case like this, too. If the next of kin are happy to have the full funeral at the crem, any officiant can be chosen; a reader or other cleric if a CofE service is used. I also think most other Anglican churches in the area would be happy to accommodate the funeral. In such cases it's common for the officiant to drop a letter to the original parish, out of courtesy. Preparing the way with a phone call or visit, usually helps, too.

It's hard to imagine a cleric who would determinedly go all out to prevent the funeral of a parishioner just because they're not the preferred minister.
 
Posted by JJSchmidt (# 16864) on :
 
Unfortunately it is quite sensitive.

The vicar came to visit her before her death about a dozen times as she was house-bound, and he was sent away as she didn't want to see him, always 'asleep' or whatever.

He turned up at the hospital the day before she died, and then came back the next day and performed the last rites as she was dying.

So he has been quite involved but very much against her wishes, e.g., the day before she died she said 'There's a service at the church, why isn't he there?'

He is/was quite determined, as was she.
 
Posted by Zacchaeus (# 14454) on :
 
As a long standing clergy person Anselmina, will have a lot of experience of this. In the days that I worked in a parish office it was rare for a family to approach the vicar directly unless they already knew him. Most negotiations were done by the Funeral Director, which could take a lot of heat out of the situation.
It would appear that the vicar has been trying very hard to carry out his pastoral duties, unaware that it was because she did not like him that he was not allowed in. So if feelings are running high it might be as well to let a third party still negotiate for you.

But as Anselmina said most clergy (except in the case of my colleague mentioned above) would accept, something like Mrs S has requested that Rev. B conduct the funeral. As he seems to take his pastoral responsibilities seriously he might agree to following her wishes.
 
Posted by Cottontail (# 12234) on :
 
Another possibility is a compromise position of sharing the service, if that isn't too unpalatable to you. If you have connections with another vicar, minister or lay worker - perhaps a previous incumbent or hospital chaplain or a family friend - then it might be possible to have both presiding at the service.

As a Church of Scotland minister with similar concerns about parish boundaries, I have done this a few times (though not because of bad relations with me, I hasten to add - or at least, not as far as I am aware!). As the incumbent I would usually start and finish the service, but any address/sermon/eulogy or more personal prayer would be done by the 'visitor'. Readings can also be shared out. It can come as a relief to hand over the address to someone who knew the deceased better than I did.
 
Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by JJSchmidt:
Unfortunately it is quite sensitive.

The vicar came to visit her before her death about a dozen times as she was house-bound, and he was sent away as she didn't want to see him, always 'asleep' or whatever.

He turned up at the hospital the day before she died, and then came back the next day and performed the last rites as she was dying.

So he has been quite involved but very much against her wishes, e.g., the day before she died she said 'There's a service at the church, why isn't he there?'

He is/was quite determined, as was she.
Gosh, he was determined! [Eek!]

Did he feel it was his duty to do for your grandmother impartially what he would do for any parishioner; or was he just being plum obstinate and not taking the hint?! I know myself, that just because one has difficult moments with a parishioner doesn't relieve one of one's responsibility to visit and minister. But if it's out of bloody-mindedness that's another thing.

How difficult for the family, and at such a painful time, it only seems so much more hurtful if things are awkward. I suppose, then, it boils down to whether or not the family wish to go to that incumbent's church for the funeral, as to how tricky it gets with regard to an officiant. I really hope it gets sorted peacefully and with great respect for your grandmother. And I hope the vicar chooses to smoothe the situation, rather than make it worse.

My condolences to you.
 
Posted by JJSchmidt (# 16864) on :
 
I don't know him personally. I know that he had been involved in some issues with other parishioners, there was something about refusing someone communion or something, and I think he is a bit 'odd'/lacking pastoral skills, so perhaps didn't understand when to back off.
 
Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 
Well, when all's been said and done I hope your memories of your grandmother's funeral will be mainly positive and satisfactory, and not reflecting difficulties with the clergy. [Votive]
 
Posted by Augustine the Aleut (# 1472) on :
 
Zacchaeus writes:
quote:
Augustine the Aleut, things might be arranged somewhat differently in Canada. But I can't see the archdeacons in the diocese I am in, getting involved in chosing an officiant for a funeral.

In fact they would not be able to do so, as the incumbent holds the license to officiate in that parish church and nobody can conduct worship there without the incumbent's permission.

The archdeacon would only be able to suggest that it might be pastorally sensitve to do so.
I proposed this in the case that the incumbent was not cooperative-- a conversation with him is best although the suggesteed funeral director approach might well be the most effective, given their experience in the field.

Here, the archdeacon would be the first step in persuading the cleric to be active in finding a solution which would work for the family and the parish, and keeping the bishop out of it. I would imagine that a variety of stratagems would come into play, such as having a clergy friend of the incumbent to have a chat with him, and volunteer to take the service. It also signals to the vicar that he is under oversight.

In almost every Canadian diocese, an incumbent's power to withhold permission is trumped by the bishop's power to grant it. The existence of this rule generally means that it never need be applied.
 
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by JJSchmidt:
I don't know him personally. I know that he had been involved in some issues with other parishioners, there was something about refusing someone communion or something, and I think he is a bit 'odd'/lacking pastoral skills, so perhaps didn't understand when to back off.
Does the funeral have to be in the Anglican church? I've taken a few funerals according to the Anglican Liturgy and I'm far from an Anglican Priest (at least by soem peole's estimation).

A lot of baptist or Methodist churches would be happy to do a funerla for someone in their locality and are genrally happy to be flexible in their approach to liturgy. Some (E-M included) don't even charge ....
 
Posted by Custard (# 5402) on :
 
Funeral directors are often allowed to take funerals.
 
Posted by Spike (# 36) on :
 
From a legal point of view, anyone is allowed to officiate at a funeral. However most religions (not necessarily Christian) have their own rules about who may do so.
 
Posted by Zacchaeus (# 14454) on :
 
I think the problem here, is that they want the church but not the vicar.

I don't know if they have approached him yet to ask for another officiant, and if so what the resopnse was.
 
Posted by Autenrieth Road (# 10509) on :
 
Is it hopelessly naive and unpastoral to wonder whether the solution is to consider that heaven is a place where earthly dislikes are transcended, and whatever the one-sided human feud between the deceased and the vicar, it is over now, and so why not have the vicar take the funeral?

OK, point out why I'm an idiot.
 
Posted by JJSchmidt (# 16864) on :
 
my parents approached the Vicar and the Vicar insists that if there is to be a service, then he must conduct it.

This was confirmed by the Area Dean.
 
Posted by Zacchaeus (# 14454) on :
 
What day is the vicars day off? -

I'm just thinking that maybe if you 'had' to have the funeral on that day, for some reason he would agree to somebody else doing it.
 
Posted by JJSchmidt (# 16864) on :
 
Well there is a cremation booked (very busy at this time of year), so there really is no option to avoid him.

Obviously is causing some conflict obviously between my Grandma's very clearly stated opposition to the man and the desire that she should have a send-off in the church that she spent much longer is than he did.

I have therefore suggested that ultimately it would be unreasonable to allow her dislike of him to exclude her from her final service at her own church and that therefore the funeral service should be conducted at her church, the presence of disliked Vicar not withstanding.
 
Posted by Olaf (# 11804) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by JJSchmidt:
my parents approached the Vicar and the Vicar insists that if there is to be a service, then he must conduct it.

This was confirmed by the Area Dean.
I am admittedly not knowledgeable about the legalities of C of E pastoral rights and responsibilities, but this this simply sounds a bit stubborn, unpastoral, and egotistical.

That said, it sounds like you made the most reasonable decision given the situation.
 
Posted by Zacchaeus (# 14454) on :
 
I suppose the nearest thing I can think of to explain it is like this.

If you had a one man doctor's surgery in a village and needed a doctor, and saying I want it to be in that surgery in my village. But I don't want the doctor who surgery it is, I want to bring my own doctor in.
 
Posted by Olaf (# 11804) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Zacchaeus:
I suppose the nearest thing I can think of to explain it is like this.

If you had a one man doctor's surgery in a village and needed a doctor, and saying I want it to be in that surgery in my village. But I don't want the doctor who surgery it is, I want to bring my own doctor in.
Ah, thanks. I understand it, but (perhaps it's just my own personality) I think it seems to be very impolite to deny the request, especially for two priests who should be a bit "above" this.
 
Posted by Zacchaeus (# 14454) on :
 
Well the area dean can’t force the vicar to allow somebody else to take a service in his church, they would have been confirming the situation.

Most vicars would, if asked the right way, allow somebody else to take a service, but they don’t have to do so, as Parish occasional offices are their responsibility.

I mentioned upthread about a colleague whose relative had left a request for the curate from their church to take her funeral, (and the curate did have a pastoral relationship during the final illness) the vicar flatly refused saying it was their responsibility to take the funeral.

They were insecure and felt authority was threatened by being ‘over looked’ in favour of the curate, the family were gutted and pleaded but to no avail..
 
Posted by Emendator Liturgia (# 17245) on :
 
Here I sit, shaking my head at the thought that such a pastorally insensitive, obdurate man would allow his own need for control to over-rule any decent, humane response to a time of grief: and some people in the church wonder why others leave/refuse to set foot in a church????
 
Posted by lily pad (# 11456) on :
 
There is obviously trouble that goes wider than this situation. Hopefully the request and the response will be noted by the area dean and, when there is more trouble, be included as one of the indicators that all has not been well for some time.

I agree with the fact that it is his call to do the service and hope that, if his integrity is in tact, that he will find a way to bring people around and do a good job for the family. Charity means that is the only hope for this. If he doesn't find a way, he is only adding another nail to his own coffin.
 
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :
 
I know it's a very sensitive situation and a painful time for everyone involved. But we are being asked to comment and suggest help without perhaps knowing the full story. Are we 100% sure that we have heard the full story and have all the facts? What's the one more fact that we might glean that could change it all?

How long has the vicar been there? Who did he replace and what kind of relationship did he have with the people in the church? Why is the vicar perceived as insensitive? A group of people in the church have left.... who? How many? Why? Friends/part of an interest group? What else is going on in the church/mission community?

Even if there is a bigger question of suitability for this church, it does seem that the Vicar has tried to sort it by trying to get to see the person concerned. She doesn't seem to have responded. He's taken more than a 1st step to resolve it. What kind of hurt might he be feeling?

[ 10. January 2013, 06:43: Message edited by: ExclamationMark ]
 
Posted by Codepoet (# 5964) on :
 
My advice would be that clergy in an area do general talk to one another. If you object to one particular member of the clergy, you are not pulling a fast one by seeking out another member of the clergy - they will doubtless be on the phone to one another immediately to find out what the background is.
It is also the case that you can't just "book a chruch" and lay on your own show - if a funeral takes place in a (CofE) church, you are recieving the ministry of the Church, not renting a building.
Of course it is entirely possible that your prefered minister might be unable to take the funeral anyway because of other commitments. In the environment that I work in, it is perfectly usual for a funeral booking to be accepted by the team, and then allocated to whichever member of the team is able to do it. If none of us are then collegues in neighbouring parishes are always happy to cover for us and us for them. Obviously if a particular minister is requested then we will do our best to enable that to happen, but if it is not then another minister will minister to the bereaved family instead.
In this context, the best option in the OPs situation whould be to just be honnest with the vicar about it, who should ensure that appropriate appangements are made.
I work in a very iconic church building that often attracts people for funerals / weddings etc who have not connection to the ministry team. On occasion a funeral has been requested but using a minister from somewhere miles away. I that case we would arrange for a member of the "home" team to also be present - to deal with practical issues, but also to present a public face of the local church, especially to mourners who are from the local community that the deceased was a part of.
It is all about teamwork. Work with them, don't be daft enough to think you can somehow work around a vicar, but still get to use the church building - it won;t work and you will just get their back up.
 
Posted by Spike (# 36) on :
 
It's very easy to accuse the Vicar of being "pastorally insensitive" but from the description I read earlier of his visits to his parishioner in her last few weeks, It strikes me he was being far from pastorally insensitive and was trying to heal wounds before she died.
 
Posted by Pigwidgeon (# 10192) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
Even if there is a bigger question of suitability for this church, it does seem that the Vicar has tried to sort it by trying to get to see the person concerned. She doesn't seem to have responded. He's taken more than a 1st step to resolve it. What kind of hurt might he be feeling?
Many years ago we had a rector my mother couldn't stand. The less she had to do with him the better. He did call around one day, and she did NOT appreciate it. She disliked him even more after that. It was a total clash of personalities, and his "trying to get to see the person concerned" would never "resolve" the situation. Just because the Vicar in this situation visited the woman when she was dying probably made no difference to her at all and may have aggravated her dislike.
 
Posted by JJSchmidt (# 16864) on :
 
My understanding is that there were a few incidents of unrelated pastoral insensitivity, such inappropriate comments in sermons, and refusing communion to a congregant. As I understand it in his previous role he also lacked the necessary soft skills.

I think you need a certain 'emotional intelligence' to be a vicar, that is perhaps not required from say a theology lecturer, or whatever.

So he might have come to see her, for instance, the day before she died, but her observation (to my mother, subsequently) was 'why isn't he conducting the service, there's a service on every week at this time', so while he might have been there on pastoral duties, for her it just confirmed her belief that he didn't do his job properly; as I understand it he forgot about the service and the congregation were stood up, and not for the first time - I think he is/was often late, and so she would pick up on that rather than thinking 'oh isn't it nice that this person, whom I dislike is here to see me', she would say 'er, shouldn't you be doing your service?'

[ 10. January 2013, 19:22: Message edited by: JJSchmidt ]
 
Posted by Olaf (# 11804) on :
 
I sympathize with others here in that the vicar hasn't shared his side of the story, but I still don't think it matters. He's a priest, and his concerns should be the pastoral care of the family at this time of grief. If the family feels it needs another priest to attend to it, then of all people a priest should be able to put aside his ego and allow it to happen, for the pastoral care of the family, secure in his knowledge that he is doing the right thing.

That said, I would expect the family would have to pay the other priest to take the liturgy, where the parish priest might not have to be paid for it.
 
Posted by no prophet (# 15560) on :
 
I'm in Canada where the governance is different. In a somewhat parallel situation when my mother-in-law died, the not-wanted priest quietly facilitated the wanted priest who didn't know the church and hall. It was very fine, though we did end up with a fee from the unwanted priest. Which I paid cash for separately and never told anyone, until just now. I think it was right for me as an in-law and not as her child to be the one doing this bit. Maybe someone in your situation can take such a role? There is so much more that's important at this time. Condolences to you.
 
Posted by Jon in the Nati (# 15849) on :
 
It does seem that this vicar bent over backward to heal whatever rift existed with the dying lady before her death. His apparent perseverance is admirable, and it seems unfortunate that whatever had gone so wrong in the pastoral relationship could not be set right.

However, to my mind that has very little to do with who should officiate at the funeral. The vicar really should find some way to accommodate the family's wishes, unless it is just completely unfeasible (and it well may be; not knowing the situation/locale well, I don't care to speculate). I fine Codepoet's approach above to be quite sensible.
 
Posted by jugular (# 4174) on :
 
It may vary according to geography, but in Australia funeral arrangement are almost always made using the funeral director as a go-between. So, even for funerals of regular members of the congregation, I would sort through the logistics with the funeral director first before looking at detail with the family. If there is any sensitivity, the funeral director will sound out the clergyperson discreetly.

For example, a colleague of mine was asked by the funeral director if he was available to conduct a funeral, and agreed to do so. Evidently there was some negative history between a family member and this priest, and the family asked the funeral director to find another. My colleague was uncertain what the issue was, but did not have to engage with the family at all.

All this is a roundabout way of saying that perhaps the funeral director could be the liaison with the vicar, and gently raise possibilities by 'playing dumb'.
 
Posted by Zacchaeus (# 14454) on :
 
The fee is not an issue in this case, as stipendiary clergy in the CofE do not recieve the fee, it is paid to their diocese.
 
Posted by Amos (# 44) on :
 
First of all, my condolences on the death of your grandmother.
Going back to the OP, and looking again at your other descriptions of the offense caused by this priest, it looks to me as if there has been what one might call a feud within the church.
One party to the feud has left and is attending church elsewhere.
Your grandmother decided that, if she wasn't going to attend her own church, she wouldn't go anywhere, stopped going to church at all, though she made sure she was kept informed right up until her death about things the priest did wrong (coming to see her instead of taking a midweek service---someone had to have told her that the congregation was left waiting).

You are seeking to continue this feud after her death. This seems to be exactly what your grandmother would have wanted of course.

If this clergyman is so objectionable---to you, not to your grandmother and her friends--then you should arrange for her funeral to take place elsewhere. If she is going to be buried, there may well be a chapel at the cemetery. The priest at the church attended by her friends might be willing to take the service. It can't be a million miles away.

If you really want to have the service in the church your grandmother left, then you ought to sit down with the priest and discuss all of this with him. He may agree to your having someone else take the service. However he may not. It's his call.
 
Posted by Zacchaeus (# 14454) on :
 
I did wonder reading the OP wether the priest is aware of the dislike to which the grandmother held him.

When he visited he was denied access because she was 'aleep' or other such reasons. He may have been a bit slow to catch on but was he ever told that he was not wanted by her.

I was also very sad that she denied herself spiritual sustenance because of her dislike of one priest
 
Posted by bib (# 13074) on :
 
This all seems to have been blown up out of all proportion. It is time all the parties involved sat down over a coffee and talked out some resolution. Despite the sad fact of the lady's death, it is not really going to affect her now where she is given a funeral service. There is no real need for the family to maintain her 'rage' and maybe they should negotiate honestly with the vicar concerned or else see the funeral director to arrange the service take place elsewhere.
 
Posted by Amos (# 44) on :
 
An afterthought: The first question the Rural Dean or the Archdeacon will ask you is, 'Have you discussed this with Fr X?' If you have to say at this point, 'No, we've never spoken to him, (because grandmother and her friends couldn't stand him,)' or words to that effect, with the suggestion that you are hoping that the Rural Dean or Archdeacon will arrange things so that you never have to speak to the priest in question, then the rest of the conversation is not likely to go well.
 
Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on :
 
Let me get this right: the vicar did visit her when she was in the hospital? The vicar also gave her Last Rites? He even skipped a service at the church to be with her? (It is not all that unusual for a vicar to be able to make arrangements for someone to take care of a service, is it?)

Seems to me he has some legitimacy in wanting to complete what he has been called to do, to serve his parishioner and/or her family.

I say time to just get it over with. Allow the vicar to do it and move on.
 
Posted by ExclamationMark (# 14715) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
... it looks to me as if there has been what one might call a feud within the church.
One party to the feud has left and is attending church elsewhere.
Yes it does rather have all the hallmarks of that doesn't it? "My understanding ... reports of lateness ... inappropriate comments in sermons .... refusing communion".

JJ actually doesn't seem to know on his own admission and is relying on the evidence and reports of others which might be the truth from where they are standing but not the whole truth. It might - just - be skewed.

As to lateness, well it's pretty endemic these days in every walk of life. Show me a church where everyone is always "in" at the start of a service. I know I am anal in the other direction to the point of near obsession on time keeping but even I accept that lateness happens - and some people are just predisposed to it or plain disorganised.

It may be that the vicar is covering more than one thing in more than one parish. He may not be a good time keeper anyway and yes, that needs work but there are times when the needs of a person are greater at one moment than taking a service. It's happened to me but I managed to get a sub to lead the first part.

Inappropriate comments? Are we talking personal matters discussed from the pulpit or a different approach from an old and much loved vicar? I've known friends get this kind of response when they have, for example preached on sin and forgiveness in a church where that had not been heard for many a year, perhaps in living memory. I'm not saying that's the answer exactly but one person's inappropriate is another's challenge to change.

Refusing communion. Well, do we know that for a fact? In the CofE as I understand it, it has to be authorised by the bishop and very very few clergy will take that kind of runner on their own. [I can only think of a 2 or 3 cases where it has happened in baptist churches - and we/they are probably more inclined to this kind of discipline. I've done it once myself but that's another story].

Is this a rumour or fact? What's the evidence - the word of someone who has issues? Surely other church leaders (PCC) would be aware: even if it was fact, what generated it in the first place.

I just feel (as someone who has acted in conflict resolution and as a mediator across denominations) that there's a lot more here than meets the eye. A fair bit of what is reported is very familiar territory to anyone who has done any amount of mediation work in churches.

Simply using another celebrant perpetuates and doesn't solve the problem, bringing mnay more people into the loop of issues they know little about. There's a danger here that some of the suggestions will build "sides" that use the funeral service for their own ends and not for the grieving family's needs.

If the "substitution" does happen, it will provide lots more ammunition for those who have left. A chorus of "told you so's" and "isn't it nice that the Archdeacon is helping us and that nice Vicar from St Whatits is helping us too."

It does seem like that there is some backgroud pressure from those who've left, not to use the Vicar, and JJ is caught in the crossfire.

I have every sympathy with you JJ - I lost my mum a couple of years ago and it's hard enough without this kind of stuff. My mum was not a churchgoer yet the service was warm and helpful and all we (and she) would have wanted. I was encouraged to preach and it felt not like them and us - but a family.

But - I do think this is an opportunity to bring healing to troubled waters.

[ 12. January 2013, 09:23: Message edited by: ExclamationMark ]
 
Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Zacchaeus:
I did wonder reading the OP wether the priest is aware of the dislike to which the grandmother held him.

When he visited he was denied access because she was 'aleep' or other such reasons. He may have been a bit slow to catch on but was he ever told that he was not wanted by her.

I was also very sad that she denied herself spiritual sustenance because of her dislike of one priest
Nothing to do with the OP, of course; but this has been my experience. A parishioner stopped coming to church, offended at something she believed I had done. When I eventually found this out, by persisting with her (she kept putting me off) I was able to prove to her, to some extent, she was quite mistaken. She then decided she preferred to listen to the church on the radio anyway and it wasn't entirely down to me that she stayed away, so no big deal. But by then, naturally, the damage (to my reputation) had been done.

The bemusing thing about this is that she kept describing herself as a 'straightforward, no-nonsense' type of person to me. To me, being straightforward is sorting out a problem, when it has become a problem, not waiting nearly a year later, after you've been bad-mouthing someone who isn't even aware of their crime! And even then only because you've been pressed to confront the issue.

Her first question when I asked her what was wrong was 'Don't you know?' You know it's going to be downhill after that! I'm used to praying for patience and wisdom - but apparently I should also be praying for psychic abilities too [Big Grin] !
 
Posted by Codepoet (# 5964) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
quote:
Originally posted by Zacchaeus:
I did wonder reading the OP wether the priest is aware of the dislike to which the grandmother held him.

When he visited he was denied access because she was 'aleep' or other such reasons. He may have been a bit slow to catch on but was he ever told that he was not wanted by her.

I was also very sad that she denied herself spiritual sustenance because of her dislike of one priest
Nothing to do with the OP, of course; but this has been my experience. A parishioner stopped coming to church, offended at something she believed I had done. When I eventually found this out, by persisting with her (she kept putting me off) I was able to prove to her, to some extent, she was quite mistaken. She then decided she preferred to listen to the church on the radio anyway and it wasn't entirely down to me that she stayed away, so no big deal. But by then, naturally, the damage (to my reputation) had been done.

The bemusing thing about this is that she kept describing herself as a 'straightforward, no-nonsense' type of person to me. To me, being straightforward is sorting out a problem, when it has become a problem, not waiting nearly a year later, after you've been bad-mouthing someone who isn't even aware of their crime! And even then only because you've been pressed to confront the issue.

Her first question when I asked her what was wrong was 'Don't you know?' You know it's going to be downhill after that! I'm used to praying for patience and wisdom - but apparently I should also be praying for psychic abilities too [Big Grin] !
You do not have to be psychic - I have discovered that you only need to be on facebook, where you will find your parishoners raking muck like it is going out of fashon. It does mean that you more quickly find out when there is a problem, but it does not make it any easier to resolve.

Back to the OP - it occurs to me that a helpful approach would be for those arranging the funeral to ask themselves if they personally have anything against the priest in question. The Deceased was obviously very angry and unforgiving, however as has been pointed out the priest had done all he could to keep the option of reconcilliation open, to avail the Deceased of the ministry of the Church and to fulfil his duties. I really do not understand why the family need to take the Deceased's unforgiveness as their own starting point for a relationship with the priest.

Next week I will be doing a funeral for a lady who used to attend the church where I work, but the church has not had any contact with her in the 2 years I have been here. It turns out that due to her frailty she had difficulties getting to church on her own, although there are systems in the parish to help people in her situation, something obviously did not work out and the parish fell out of touch with her.
When I spoke the family about this, their approach was to say that they had told her to contact the church but she replied "I should not have to". As a result, she spent the last 4 years of her life estranged from the church. However the family recognised that did not have to be their own starting point for a relationship with me, and hopefully we will have a funeral that will allow for a cerain amount of healing to take place.
 
Posted by JJSchmidt (# 16864) on :
 
I just spoke to my parents.

They (or my specifically, my mother, who is the deceased's daughter) have decided that because of the strength of my grandmother's feelings, allowing him to conduct the service is out of the question.

So they are holding the service at the crematorium. The vicar who will conduct the service was involved with her at the Mothers Union so he is a justified choice, and not just a random vicar off a list.

With respect to the vicar of the parish, there are various things that are a matter of public record in terms of insensitivity/oddness, that have appeared on websites and in newspapers and online and which I found by googling. that make it clear to me that he has, as I said, low 'emotional intelligence'. I could post these links here but they would identify him and I don't think that that would be productive.

I think you could say that her dislike of him was a little excessive, not hatred, she just thought he was useless and she didn't have respect for ineffective people. Despite that, he's obviously refused the request for an alternate to conduct the service, so I would say that while my personal opinion might, in her shoes, have been nothing stronger 'X is not a very good vicar', it's my assessment that that opinion is justified.
 
Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Codepoet:
You do not have to be psychic - I have discovered that you only need to be on facebook, where you will find your parishoners raking muck like it is going out of fashon. It does mean that you more quickly find out when there is a problem, but it does not make it any easier to resolve.

Thank you. I am on facebook. The person in question and I suppose her associates were not. And I know there were no hints on facebook or otherwise what my sin had been! Not even a 'concerned' parishioner whispering in my ear.

I find that while there's a lot that's pretty objectionable at times on it, my facebook feed is pretty free of muck-raking in terms of what I'd call gossip or malicious speculation - if you don't count political and international situations. I also only have a very small number of parishioners as 'friends' (maybe less than a dozen) and none of them appears to muck-rake, unless they do it by Private Message.

I have a feeling that the muck-rakers tend to enjoy the more traditional methods of spreading their ideas about!

Anyway, I believe that speaking directly to a person, at the time the problem arises, is probably the best and fastest way to solve that problem (if at all) rather than waiting till it gets round the grapevine - if it ever does. That's my definition of being 'straightforward' at any rate.
 
Posted by Anselmina (# 3032) on :
 
JJSchmidt, so he did refuse to allow another clergyperson to officiate in the church? Very strange and unpastoral indeed. But many clergy are, sadly. Your family seems to have come up with the best solution, then.

I hope your grandmother's funeral goes well and you're all able to look back upon it knowing all was done as well as possible. [Votive]
 
Posted by JJSchmidt (# 16864) on :
 
My grandmother's funeral was today (or yesterday now).

Unfortunately I see that the vicar has taken it upon himself to put his name in the local newspaper spouting absolute bollocks about her (not disparaging or rude, just completely incorrect), which would be hurtful if he wasn't held in such contempt.

I don't understand why he didn't get the message, the funeral was not held in his church, so what the hell is he doing a rentaquote for the newspaper talking ill-informed rubbish when he wasn't wanted?
 
Posted by Amos (# 44) on :
 
The local paper undoubtedly approached him, and he said what he knew, or what he thought he knew. You can hardly expect him to have said, 'I wasn't wanted. The deceased and her friends held me in contempt. I can say nothing.' Had he said, 'No comment,' that would have been published too.

Your grandmother would be proud of you.
 
Posted by Doublethink (# 1984) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by JJSchmidt:
I don't understand why he didn't get the message,
Perhaps because no one ever actually told him ?
 
Posted by Zacchaeus (# 14454) on :
 
I doubt he went to the press, much more likely they came to him. The press often contact vicars first for local knowledge.

If he had dissembled or declined to speak in any way who knows what the press would have said or thought about your grandmother. What did you want him to do?
 
Posted by JJSchmidt (# 16864) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
The local paper undoubtedly approached him,
No, he undoubtedly approached the local paper.

quote:
and he said what he knew, or what he thought he knew. You can hardly expect him to have said, 'I wasn't wanted. The deceased and her friends held me in contempt. I can say nothing.' Had he said, 'No comment,' that would have been published too.
It's just a human interest story in a local paper, they wouldn't publish something if there was nothing said.

He shouldn't make things up in any case.


quote:

Your grandmother would be proud of you.
Ok?
 
Posted by Amos (# 44) on :
 
Why 'undoubtedly'? That's not the way these things usually work.
 
Posted by JJSchmidt (# 16864) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Amos:
Why 'undoubtedly'? That's not the way these things usually work.
Because the article is centred on his quotes, and from the errors of fact in the rest of the article it's apparent that he was the source, and the article essentially defines her as a devoted churchgoer, which is a narrow view of her life, obviously from the perspective of the vicar.

In any case that's what he does, he likes to record things about the dying - apparently he upset another parishioner whose husband was dying, by insisting on staying and questioning him when she was saying 'Look, he's very tired, I think you should go', and he said, basically, 'I'm speaking to him, go away'.
 
Posted by seasick (# 48) on :
 
Now that the funeral has taken place, this thread is debating a pastoral situation which is outside the remit of Ecclesiantics. I am therefore going to close it.

JJSchmidt: Please accept the condolences of all the hosts on the death of your grandmother. We hope that you and your family will know some comfort in these days.

seasick, Eccles host
 


© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0