Father Ed: there is room for every hope
October 20, 2009
BBC World Radio surprised me with a call today, inviting me to take part in a broadcast debate on the “Tina Turner -esque funeral” trend in Britain. I learned from the journalist that an uproar had been stimulated by an Anglican vicar (Revd. Fr. Edward Tomlinson SSC of Saint Barnabas Church) speaking frankly about the - in his view - spiritual emptiness and superficiality of secular funerals.
Given that Perpetua’s Garden is clearly not yet a mainstream initiative (may it one day become the new mainstream!), the journalist presumed I might like to argue the alternative view - he still needed to suss out someone for the “traditionalist” side. Flattered though I am, I will decline - if he even calls back after I told him that Perpetua’s Garden was more about the place (a new kind of cemetery) than what happens there (the funeral rituals).
In fact, I categorically take no sides when it comes to how each person deals with death or wants to celebrate it. Father Ed has his beliefs, as those commenting on his blog have theirs. Fair is fair - as beliefs each is valid. But I am not a vicar, or an atheist, or a humanist - I am simply someone trying to provide a better alternative for EVERYONE, regardless of belief.
Yes, Perpetua’s Garden is hoping to develop a better alternative than the funeral industry (which is every bit as superficial and spiritually empty as Father Ed presents secular funerals to be.) But it has no intention of substituting the spiritual function of the church - rather it will have room to integrate the church’s practises and beliefs, along with those of all other beliefs or non-beliefs. That is, there will be room for every hope, room for every denomination or individual to celebrate their beliefs about life and death - the traditionally religious, the “free-thinkers”, new-agers, environmentalists, atheists, whoever, however.
Whatever my own personal beliefs may be, ABSOLUTE freedom must be allowed to every other person’s faith. Freedom to believe in this, or that, or even specifically in Nothing. If the state of Death has any reality, then it is by default a spiritual one - beyond a decaying body or some cremated remains, it certainly has no material reality. And as as a spiritual matter, let no-one dictate to anyone else what is right and wrong here. We can express and live our beliefs with regard to death, but we must not dictate or impose them on others - people understandably object violently to such efforts. (And anyway, imposed spirituality is quite meaningless - belief is there or it isn’t, full stop.)
In conclusion, it seems fair that Father Ed is reluctant or sees no meaning to secular motifs being aired in his specifically religious place. Perpetua’s Garden on the other hand allows absolute freedom of belief - it does not presume to judge who is closer to the truth and who is therefore allowed entry or not. It will provide space for each to practise in their way.
In Death we are all equal - “ROOM FOR EVERY HOPE” is thus the first and most fundamental premise of Perpetua’s Garden.
Individuality and graves
April 14, 2009
Contemplation of the ravens that I feed on my terrace led to interesting conclusions about the importance of individuality in human relations, conclusions which can be extended to our graves and cemeteries.
Unique individuality is not apparent to me here
I noticed that I was very curious if the raven that came each day to eat my offerings was the same bird or always another of the thousands that overwinter in Vienna. Since these birds appear identical to my non-raven eyes, I began fantasizing about complicated methods of marking the birds to establish their individual or collective identity.
How curious! Yet how characteristic of humanity. As humans, we strive to establish the unique identity of those with whom we interact, especially those close to us, and we do this through their individuality. Our closer relationships are with specific human beings, and we know and relate in unique ways to their unique individuality. Equally do we try to establish ourselves as unique individuals in the eyes of others.
Or here unfortunately....
In this way we are different from animals, especially lower forms such as insects to whom other individuals are merely interchangeable functional units of the social whole. In higher animals such as dogs, primates, elephants, dolphins and many others, individuality begins to become important. This is evident in the differing relations between individuals in the group, in a pack of dogs for example. The individual dogs are not interchangeable, and the relationship between any two is a unique phenomenon. When higher animals die, there is also evident mourning from the rest of their community. At the other end of the spectrum, the death of an individual ant is not even noticed; it immediately becomes mere food for the others.
As the most developed animal - and also more than animal - human beings are obsessed with individuality, even when it cannot be satisfied or has no functional purpose, such as my curiosity about the raven’s identity.
Roman cremation urn: a unique memory for a unique individual
The desire for individuality extends even beyond death, which is obvious in the memorialization arrangements people have constantly made for themselves over the millenia. The greater the means, the greater the individualization of the arrangements. Thus pharoahs built huge pyramids and mausoleums with marvelous and unique art works; but even the humble Egyptian farmer spent as much as he could possibly afford for his own Book of the Dead and sarcophagus.
Differences in the importance attached to the individuality of grave memorials can also be seen between societies. Our own western society has recently tended towards minimizing this individuality, applying standardization even to our graves. We purchase anonymous mass-produced urns, we are buried under rows of minimal and identical tombstones with only a name and date to distinguish ourselves from the other thousands near us. Or we dispense with the marker altogether and are buried anonymously or scattered to the winds or the waters.
One is tempted to ascribe this uniformity to a mass-produced modern human beings without individual tastes and desires. But I believe this cannot be true, because we live in an especially individualistic society. (The real reason, our lost hope for transcendence over death, will be the topic of a future blog entry).
No, I believe the desire to leave behind a memory of one’s unique existence, to be remembered as an individual and not a number, survives in all of us, if only latently beneath thick layers of socialized conformity. Similarly, I believe cemeteries filled with unique memorials of others satisfies our characteristic human desire to relate to unique individuals, even dead ones or ones we never knew. Nothing is more depressing to the spirit than walking through a cemetery with thousands of identical and utterly non-individual stones. Except perhaps a cemetery without markers altogether, since here the individual has finally given up all aspiration to individuality.
In contrast, a cemetery like Perpetua’s Garden would strive to provide memorials for every unique individual, regardless of means. Memorials that express their individuality, their contemporary tastes, their personal beliefs, their private hopes. Of course, our own modern-day pharoahs have the right to create grand memorials for themselves. But our contemporary equivalent of the simple farmer should also have the right to be remembered and thought of as the unique individual that he or she was.
Making this possible for all is one of the most important tasks of Perpetua’s Garden. Alongside perpetual rest for all.