The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1901-07-27
TRUTH AT FUNERALS.
The Error Made by the Minister I'm
the Case of Mr.. Martin.

Washington Post.
The Chicago Chronicle is one of a number
of our Northwestern contemporaries that
make mention of a funeral sermon recently
preached in Indiana. 1t was a remarkable
discourse, and it furnishes a fitting subject
for serious treatment by the press. The de-
ceased had been a prominent man, but had
been wrecked, as many another prominent
man has been in all the ages. by the drink
habit. The minister who ofhciated at his
funeral chose to hold up the sad story of
his life as an awful example, dwelling espe-
cially on the point that although he had
once had a fortune, he had come to want
through drink and his remains had been
sent home in a cheap pine coffin" The
Chronicle suggests:
perhaps il in life he had robbed some
body and thus prepared the way for "A
costly funeral, he would have escaped par
ticular criticism. If the Indiana custom OF
saying things at funerals spreads to any eX-
tent it will be come necessary for surviving
friends 10 insist on the submission in ad-
vance of written copies of the parsons in
tended remarks, as Benjamin Harrison and
William Mckinley used to do with the gen
tlemen who Were to make speeches at them
during political campaigns"
AS to that perhaps We shall not attempt
81 decision. There may be minister's, and
this Indiana preacher may be one of them,
who. If called TO preach the funeral sermon
~ q ~ a1@fL NO0l4 civ ~ " - q
duty TO review his life, nothing eXtenu-
ating nor setting down aught in malice"
We believe there are preachers who, like
this Indiana sample. would be utterly re-
sardless of the feelings of relatives and
friends, and. over the coffin OF a wicked
multimillionaire. would tell the unVarniShed
truth. One can respect the sincerity and
moral courage of such ministers, for those
qualities belong to the equipment of the
ideal preacher; but the generally accepted
opinion Is that they sadly lack discretion,
which also belongs TO that outfit. We are
by no means certain that the poverty OF q
subject OF funeral oratOry eXertS much in
fiuence upon the average preacher, nor is it
usual TO witness a display of pulpit toady-
ism over the remains of a wealthy subject.
1t would be useless to argue with a min
lister who holds that he is bound 10 dis
| sect the character Of the sinner over whose
remains he holds forth. Conscience is not
always amenable to sound reason or plain
common sense. Many of the blacklist
crimes in history have been the products of
conscientious convictions. But We think
that Indiana preacher erred in not notify
ing the friends of the deceased that if he
accepted their invitation he should feel
compelled TO say unpleasant things. That
would have given them an opportunity to
avert a distressful scene.
Speak no evil of the dead" is a maxim
that should not always be obeyed. There
are occasions when duty to the living i'm
peratively calls for the utterance of ugly
truths concerning those who have closed
their earthly account. But ii is a rare oc-
casion that requires a minister to rake up
the sins of the departed and recount them
over his coffin In the presence of those who
preachers mistaken view of duty was but
one of millions who yielded 10 the habit
which disgraced Noah, degraded Lot, and
has oVerthrown some of the highest. purest
and best Of their successors in every time
and country. We think it was a cruel mis-
take TO refer TO that cheap pine coffin"