I worked as a cantor at one of the largest UGC parishes in North America for a few years and over that period I sang a lot of funerals. The norm there was this, panakhyda in the funeral home the night before, another one in the morning before going to the church, liturgy with last kiss and panachyda and then off to the cemetery. The pastor thought it prudent to introduce more of the parastas on the morning of, so upon arrival at the church we began the parastas and at the beatitudes, the clergy entered the alter, and after the gospel reading we would continue with the divine liturgy from that point on. It seems like a natural enough transition. I would even sing the stichera of St. John of Damascus during the clergy communion. It was a good compromise.

My objection to Eucharist at a funeral service are very practical.
a) The order of burial is in the trebnik and nowhere does it mention the serving of divine liturgy.
b) Funerals often have many visitors in attendance which are from outside the church, and families of the deceased are often not church going themselves. This can lead to awkward situations concerning the reception of communion. Even if the priest explains that one must be practicing and prepared, there is this obligation on the part of the family to go to communion, even when unprepared. I think that is not very prudent.
c)The texts of the order of burial may be some of THE MOST BEAUTIFUL texts our tradition has to offer. When done beautifully, they can serve as an invaluable catechism for visitors, family that have fallen away from the church, and especially for the believer who does this regularly.


Another reason, though kid of silly, is time constraints. Families would always ask for a speedy service so they can get to the restaurant for lunch on time. Ha! When they made this request we used it as an opportunity to drop the Divine Liturgy and just do the order of burial. In these cases, no one notices anyway.

At our parish, the norm has become this:
The body is brought to the church the day before. The family stays with the body and take turns reading the psalms over the deceased. In the evening the parastas is served. The family is welcome to stay with the body as late as they want, continually reading the psalter. In the morning the order of burial is sung without Eucharist. After the final kiss and panakhyda, we carry the body to the cemetery located behind the church while the bells are tolled. After the body is lowered and the sealing of the grave, the family and friends fill in the grave with shovels. After which, everyone returns to the church hall for the meal.

No driving in funeral processions or costly police escort, no sinfully ridiculous funeral home costs. Simple, green, organic, therapeutic, absolutely lovely, and true to our ancestral traditions. This is the way to go.

There is no closure like seeing the body buried with your own eyed and using your own hands. At a funeral two weeks ago, the family was wailing when we began to shovel the dirt, but by the time we were finishing they were smiling and even laughing with each other. It was a beautiful sight. And most importantly, you are not leaving the body of your deceased un-lowered and in the hands of some creepy cemetery worker, chewing gum in his dirty orange coveralls and baseball cap. He has no place there.

I won't get into my whole thing about embalming.

If the family really wants a "funeral mass", you can give them the option of gathering on the third, ninth, or fortieth day for Eucharist. This gives the ones that want it a chance to prepare, and the ones that shouldn't be going to communion probably won't come.

Practical no?

ig