I don’t think Beyond the Reach of God is an ideal text for an event like this as it’s not inclusive to everyone. With the last Solstice we stopped using it because we had a rationalist Christian with us. Inclusivity seems to me even more important for an event like a funeral.
Fortunately, I haven’t had the need of designing a funeral ritual and I hope that it will stay that way for a while. If I would however design one, I would start by getting people connected to their bodies. Connection to the felt sense is central to be able to process an emotion like grief.
1. An important principle in ritual is “be as oddly specific as you can get away with” (but no more).
The more a ritual communicates “the people in this room are connected by something special unique and important”, the more moving an experience it’ll be. It doesn’t do any good to be arbitrarily inclusive – that’ll just result in a watered down compromise that isn’t exciting to anyone.
This can mean different things in different contexts. If you have a small, tight knit community where you know everyone’s beliefs, you can do something specific that you are confident will resonate with everyone. In some cases this might mean avoiding topics that happen to be controversial in your group (but, if you are aware that everyone on the group is on the same page about some other normally controversial idea, you can go all in on that)
Some of my first “large scale” Solstices had the “watered down to the point that people were less excited” problem. Eventually I realized that weird or controversial things aren’t intrinsically alienating – it depends a lot on what tone and context you set.
I decided my goal with NY Solstice was to be an event that my rationalist friends were deeply excited by, but which my family wouldn’t feel alienated by – it was important to me that my mom/dad/grandma could come. Importantly, my mom, as well as .a family friend who came one year who were both Catholic, don’t have any problem with Beyond the Reach of God. (Family friend said it in fact resonated with issues of theodicy that he’s thought a lot about)
This doesn’t mean you should do it in your group, just, be aware that it’s much more possible to walk the “oddly-specific-without-alienating-people” tightrope than you might think, which may apply in various ways. (It does require skill, just, but it is achievable)
At the memorial in question, everyone was an atheist or at least atheist-adjaecent, and I think it was important to actually acknowledge and face squarely “this person is gone forever.”
2. Framing things in terms of the deceased’s beliefs
I mentioned in the OP – it seems much less alienating to me to phrase things in terms of “this person believed X” rather than “we believe X” (or, just “X!”). I typically don’t want to get preached at at a funeral, but I do want to honor or at least acknowledge the things that were important to that person, even when I disagree.
3. Exploring Third Options
Finally, importantly I did not read all of Beyond the Reach of God. (This was not like reading a speech, it was more like lifting some key quotes out that fit more reasonably into a specific custom narrative. I don’t actually remember which bits I used but I think they may not have even referenced God – more focused on the “a rationalist who fully understands the mess they’re in may not be able to find a way out” aspect.)
Point being, there are options to highlight shared canon without delving into all it’s official nuances, sticking the bits that are most relevant.
I don’t think Beyond the Reach of God is an ideal text for an event like this as it’s not inclusive to everyone. With the last Solstice we stopped using it because we had a rationalist Christian with us. Inclusivity seems to me even more important for an event like a funeral.
Fortunately, I haven’t had the need of designing a funeral ritual and I hope that it will stay that way for a while. If I would however design one, I would start by getting people connected to their bodies. Connection to the felt sense is central to be able to process an emotion like grief.
Couple thoughts on that:
1. An important principle in ritual is “be as oddly specific as you can get away with” (but no more).
The more a ritual communicates “the people in this room are connected by something special unique and important”, the more moving an experience it’ll be. It doesn’t do any good to be arbitrarily inclusive – that’ll just result in a watered down compromise that isn’t exciting to anyone.
This can mean different things in different contexts. If you have a small, tight knit community where you know everyone’s beliefs, you can do something specific that you are confident will resonate with everyone. In some cases this might mean avoiding topics that happen to be controversial in your group (but, if you are aware that everyone on the group is on the same page about some other normally controversial idea, you can go all in on that)
Some of my first “large scale” Solstices had the “watered down to the point that people were less excited” problem. Eventually I realized that weird or controversial things aren’t intrinsically alienating – it depends a lot on what tone and context you set.
I decided my goal with NY Solstice was to be an event that my rationalist friends were deeply excited by, but which my family wouldn’t feel alienated by – it was important to me that my mom/dad/grandma could come. Importantly, my mom, as well as .a family friend who came one year who were both Catholic, don’t have any problem with Beyond the Reach of God. (Family friend said it in fact resonated with issues of theodicy that he’s thought a lot about)
This doesn’t mean you should do it in your group, just, be aware that it’s much more possible to walk the “oddly-specific-without-alienating-people” tightrope than you might think, which may apply in various ways. (It does require skill, just, but it is achievable)
At the memorial in question, everyone was an atheist or at least atheist-adjaecent, and I think it was important to actually acknowledge and face squarely “this person is gone forever.”
2. Framing things in terms of the deceased’s beliefs
I mentioned in the OP – it seems much less alienating to me to phrase things in terms of “this person believed X” rather than “we believe X” (or, just “X!”). I typically don’t want to get preached at at a funeral, but I do want to honor or at least acknowledge the things that were important to that person, even when I disagree.
3. Exploring Third Options
Finally, importantly I did not read all of Beyond the Reach of God. (This was not like reading a speech, it was more like lifting some key quotes out that fit more reasonably into a specific custom narrative. I don’t actually remember which bits I used but I think they may not have even referenced God – more focused on the “a rationalist who fully understands the mess they’re in may not be able to find a way out” aspect.)
Point being, there are options to highlight shared canon without delving into all it’s official nuances, sticking the bits that are most relevant.