Crematoria Cowboys

It is interesting that Ruth Gledhill referred to 'Crematoria Cowboys' in her 2008 piece in the Times, for this is a problem that appears to not only be always with us, but is also, if my recent experiences are anything to go on, on the increase.

When I was training we had a local crematorium where three retired clergy had set themselves up with 'duty days' so that, in the case of local clergy not being available, they would do the service. Now this was quite popular with the local dog-collars because they didn't have to rush about doing services for people they didn't know and they maintained their own round of visits and stuff without the added burden of more work!

Many of the local undertakers knew that if there was no relationship with a local church they could could turn to one of the three ministers and they would be sorted.

Then the diocese sent out a letter to local clergy telling them that they were missing a pastoral opportunity at a church level and the fees were being missed at a church level so they should take every funeral that came their way. Undertakers were asked to route funerals to the nearest church to the deceased should there be no prior relationship and they wished to have a 'church' service.

This touched me at a number of levels:

1. A funeral is an opportunity for a very special pastoral engagement and viewing it as just 'work' was a sad reflection on the attitude of some of those with dog-collars,

2. I was impressed that the three old geezers were offering a service (in every sense) to the community and to their colleagues,

3. I was saddened that despite the pastoral wording, the emphasis appeared to be that the diocese was losing income!

Where I am we have a few people springing up, offering themselves for funerals, in a number of guises and forms. We have:

i. The person who is billing himself as a 'military' chaplain in order to do services for those who have served in one of the three branches of our armed forces,

2. We have those who belong to weird and wonderful denominations ie. the free and independent Anglican Episcopalian Reformed Church (I made the name up - don't want to upset just one group do I?) and are taking services which are billed as CofE at the Crem,

3. The rise in humanist (or 'non-religious') 'ministers' (seems to me that 'humanist minister' is an oxymoron!) appears to be driven by the customers saying they aren't religious! Once that's said it seems that some undertakers offer a 'humanist' (with all that doesn't perhaps offer) to suit their clients needs. I have asked some people who had humanist ministers do a funeral service for a member of their family and found that they didn't specifically ask for a humanist but merely said they 'weren't religious' and the rest just sort of happened.

One staff member of a funeral company about an hour away from me told me that they used some people on a 'booking fee' basis. What this meant was, in this cash-strapped age, that the funeral director took a percentage of the minister's fee for providing the booking. With the number of FDs going to the wall I can understand that any revenue stream is welcome, but I'm not sure this is totally ethical or efficacious and regarding fees and the CofE might mean less services for CofE clergy!

Then we have the diocesan money people, I bet they are most unchuffed at the thought of independent ministers and humanists getting the business, but this is perhaps more fiscal that theological or pastoral?

Considering the fact that the CofE relies so heavily upon retired clergy, I am always saddened when we start talking about restricting fees or taking percentages from them (although of course them offering percentages would be nice) but we shouldn't muzzle the ox that treads the grain, should we?

As for the others - bumped into a freelance dog-collar who was offering prayer and taking 'donations' in a place they had no right to be and when I appeared (looking official) they pretty much legged it! Seems that there is money to be made from funerals and some aren't shy in taking it!

How very mercenary and sad :(

CofE fees - pay more, gain nothing?

The implications of the Ecclesiastical Fees (Amendment) Measure 2011 cropped up yesterday. As a result I learned about the old days where incumbents could have more income than bishops and how augmentation provided for the poorer parishes. The benefits of a consistent stipend and the issues of a common purse and parish share all bobbed to the surface like detritus from a sunken liner!

Honourably, the first (quotable) comment considered the fact that the CofE is pricing itself out of the market when it comes to funerals and weddings. The cost of a base funeral being (with fees) is c. £2,000.

There is much pressure and hype regarding attracting weddings back into church buildings and yet, pound for pound, even though the buildings are attractive, in terms of venue alone, we are just not competitive. Then again, as one senior cleric put it, we possess a value added factor in that God is at hand to bless in our services (does that mean He curses i.e. withholds blessing, the others?).

We need to get our act together and realise that there is much at stake in the way that we market (used to be called evangelism), and charge for, what the Church offers.

I have much to wade through on this topic (thought the rural dean bit was just organising meetings, didn't know I had to read and understand stuff too :) ).

This is not a good measure and the mutterings about fees going directly to diocesan coffers and the like will do nothing to settle the troops and less in attracting punters!

Pax