# Regulative Principle and Funeral Services



## Fly Caster (Jul 12, 2011)

Is there any inconsistency with the practice of funeral services and the Regulative Principle? In other words,, what is the scriptural warrant for this practice?

This is not something that I've looked into or thought much about-- just a question that popped into my mind. Off the top of my head, I'm not thinking of any examples given in scripture. I'm not talking about how the Principle affects what may be done in a funeral service (although that would make a good topic) but about the practice itself.


----------



## nwink (Jul 12, 2011)

A funeral is not a worship service


----------



## Fly Caster (Jul 12, 2011)

Can there be corporate singing of hymns & psalms and the preaching of the Word without worship?


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Jul 12, 2011)

Deut 34 talks about the Israelites mourning for Moses for 30 days and I can think of the mourners that were present when Lazarus died. These activities may not look like a modern funeral service, but I think it shows that having an activity that pays respect to the deceased as well as offers a way for those to grieve is Biblical. In our society, this activity is a funeral.


----------



## Joseph Scibbe (Jul 12, 2011)

I would maintain that a funeral is not a worship service. Otherwise, would someone be considered to be sinning for not attending without good reason? Funerals are a time for a family and friends to gather and weep for their loss and look forward to their (hopefully) reuinion. I don't think you can classify it as a gathered worship service.


----------



## Jack K (Jul 12, 2011)

Funerals are family events done for the family, not specifically for the corporate worship of God. It's perfectly appropriate for the church to be involved, for a pastor to lead and to speak, for God to be praised through singing, for others in the church to attend, etc. But strictly speaking, although they share some characteristics with worship services (as do certain other gatherings of believers) they are not worship services. They are funeral services. A family affair, not a church affair.


----------



## Romans922 (Jul 12, 2011)

Jack K said:


> Funerals are family events done for the family, not specifically for the corporate worship of God. It's perfectly appropriate for the church to be involved, for a pastor to lead and to speak, for God to be praised through singing, for others in the church to attend, etc. But strictly speaking, although they share some characteristics with worship services (as do certain other gatherings of believers) they are not worship services. They are funeral services. A family affair, not a church affair.



Not saying you are wrong, but would the same be true concerning presbytery meetings which are business meetings and there being the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, or weddings...or so-called wednesday night services.


----------



## Pergamum (Jul 12, 2011)

Good, since a funeral is not covered under the RPW I can go ahead with my plans for a Mime Funeral now.


----------



## Gage Browning (Jul 12, 2011)

Pergamum said:


> Good, since a funeral is not covered under the RPW I can go ahead with my plans for a Mime Funeral now.


----------



## Marrow Man (Jul 12, 2011)

While a funeral service is not the same thing as the corporate worship of God's people on the Lord's Day, it is a gathering to give thanks to God for the life of the deceased, to give comfort to the family and friends gathered, to point to the hope of the resurrection for those who are in Christ. If it's not supposed to be a worship service, then please stop having it in church buildings, stop asking for ministers to officiate, stop having prayers and the reading of Scripture, etc. Go ahead and have a completely secular gathering if that's the case. Or just dispense with the service altogether.

If you attended a funeral service that was held at a church or funeral home chapel and officiated by a minister, but there was no reading of Scripture, no mention of the resurrection, no prayer, but lots of feel-good stories about how great of a guy the deceased was, would that be ok since it's not a "worship service"?

I am bound by ordination vows to treat it as a worship service. Here is the appropriate section from the ARP Directory of Public Worship:



> FUNERALS AND MEMORIAL SERVICES
> 
> Precious in the sight of the LORD is the death of his saints.(272)
> 
> ...



Once again, I understand the rationale for wanting to distinguish this type of service from worship on the Lord's Day, but this seems like throwing out the baby with the bathwater. If one says it is not a worship service, and therefore the Regulative Principle does not apply, then allowing secular songs, readings from something other than Scripture, eulogizing the deceased by non-ministers, etc. can take place, and this does not honor God, in my opinion.


----------



## Fly Caster (Jul 12, 2011)

From the _ Directory for the Publick Worship of God_:

_Concerning Burial of the Dead.

WHEN any person departeth this life, let the dead body, upon the day of burial, be decently attended from the house to the place appointed for publick burial, and there immediately interred, without any ceremony.

And because the custom of kneeling down, and praying by or towards the dead corpse, and other such usages, in the place where it lies before it be carried to burial, are superstitious; and for that praying, reading, and singing, both in going to and at the grave, have been grossly abused, are no way beneficial to the dead, and have proved many ways hurtful to the living; therefore let all such things be laid aside.

Howbeit, we judge it very convenient, that the Christian friends, which accompany the dead body to the place appointed for publick burial, do apply themselves to meditations and conferences suitable to the occasion and that the minister, as upon other occasions, so at this time, if he be present, may put them in remembrance of their duty.

That this shall not extend to deny any civil respects or deferences at the burial, suitable to the rank and condition of the party deceased, while he was living. 
_

I'm curious to know the rationale behind the change in practice, especially in Reformed circles.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Jul 12, 2011)

Weddings and funerals are social conventions. There isn't anything untoward about a minister presiding at either.

Funerals (and memorial services) lend themselves a bit more to the structure of a worship service. That is, when I have conducted them, in a church, we have treated it as an "occasional" or "special" service (and not on the Lord's Day). The whole church is not called for stated worship. If it be treated as a worship service, I will not conduct it with eulogies. My preaching has been of a text of Scripture, turning the attendees from thoughts of earth, to thoughts of God, Christ, and eternity. It is not a sermon on the life of the deceased. For reasons I think fairly clear (an reflected in the venerable DPW quoted above) sacramental observance seems out of place on this occasion, as with most special services.

The reason for service-austerity in the post-Reformation period has a lot to do with the break with the excessive Roman traditions and beliefs--which the old DPW addresses. But note that "civil respects" (i.e. a funeral/memorial) are not ruled out. But the generality of poor believers, without rank in society, were not expected to have family gather from tens or hundreds of miles. Bodies were not typically embalmed. The body was soon prepared for burial, and taken to the gravesite. There (without the ceremonies of masses, incense, prayers for the dead, etc.) the minister might say a few words (as the DPW of then, and today) encourages. The general social changes of the last 450 years have a lot to do with the ups and downs of the formalities of our practice.


Weddings have also undergone many changes. I do not call a wedding a worship service--not with all the additional things we like to do in them, as a society. It wasn't too long ago in America that many good religious (but poor) folk would make a simple visit to the Justice of the Peace, and have their marriage recorded (so, my own grandparents). Not so much hoopla. High-churchers were more likely to have a religious ceremony. This simplicity in our country was actually in keeping with the much older tradition of publishing of the banns, followed at the appropriate interval by an announcement of the marriage.

I would not recommend a call to worship at a wedding (although a benediction specially for the couple seems appropriate). Weddings, according to our conventions, are an audience-participation event held for two people. A traditional "protestant" wedding service in America (of whatever denomination) where the leader's and participants' lines and sometimes even prayer is according to form, basically follows the form of the old Anglican wedding liturgy. This is even true (so I've been told) in churches of a Lutheran (i.e. continental) stripe. The message given by the minister is also more likely to be a Scriptural exhortation to the couple, related to their new life, duties, family, joint service to God, etc. We also generally do not engage in sacramental worship (communion) at weddings, the way it is often done in high-church settings.


----------



## iainduguid (Jul 13, 2011)

I seem to recall Horton Davies noting that there was a disagreement at the time of the Westminster Assembly when one of the English commissioners died. The Scots boycotted the funeral because they heard that there would be preaching there. So the ARP Directory of Public worship is a bit ironic given its Scottish roots, even though this is one of the very few areas as a Scot that I might concede something to the English. A funeral is not a worship service in the strict sense, but any time I can get people to listen to someone preach Christ and the resurrection, it seems like a good thing to do.


----------

