Posted on 08/08/2014 6:38:41 PM PDT by markomalley
Julie Atwood was standing at her son's casket when the phone rang. The church where her son's funeral was scheduled to be held the next day decided to abruptly cancel the service, after the pastor learned the deceased was gay and his obituary listed a surviving "husband."
Atwood said she was told it would be "blasphemous" to hold the services at the church because her son, Julion Evans, 42, was gay.
"It was devastating," she said. "I did feel like he was being denied the dignity of death."
Evans' husband, Kendall Capers, says the pair were partners for 17 years and married last year in Maryland. Evans died at home after a 4-year battle with a rare illness called Amyloidosis, which destroys organs in the body.
He says the obituary named him as "husband," and that their marriage was no secret.
"Everyone who knew us knew about our relationship," he said. "We didn't keep secrets."
The family asked for Evans' funeral to be held at New Hope Missionary Baptist Church in Tampa.
Atwood, Evans' mother, says she was baptized at the church as a child and several of her family members still attend. Atwood's current pastor agreed to preach the funeral, but they needed a large church, like New Hope, to accommodate hundreds of mourners from across the country. New Hope agreed and the service was scheduled for July 26.
But when the obituary published in the local newspaper, everything changed.
T.W. Jenkins, pastor at New Hope says was not aware of that Evans had a husband or was gay until members of his congregation saw the obit and called to complain. They did not think it was right to have the funeral at their church.
Jenkins said his church preaches against gay marriage.
"Based on our preaching of the scripture, we would have been in error to allow the service in our church," Jenkins said. "I'm not trying to condemn anyone's lifestyle, but at the same time, I am a man of God, and I have to stand up for my principles."
Because of the late change of plans, Evans' family scrambled to make new funeral arrangements, with less than 24 hours to prepare. They were unable to notify everyone, though, and some mourners showed up at the church and missed the funeral.
Capers said that was the worst part. He wanted the funeral held in a church but said he would have understood the church's position. But to cancel during his husband's wake, he said, was “disrespectful” and “wrong.”
"This is 2014, this is not the 60s or the 70s,” Capers said. “So at the end of the day I just want his wrong-doing to be exposed.”
No one is more against the queer agenda than I am, but I can’t see why they wouldn’t hold a funeral for him. It’s not at all like a wedding.
HAHA, no law against this yet.
These people scoff at Churches that believe homosexuality is a sin yet wish to ... USE the church to hold their memorial and then are indignant when the Church doesn’t agree. Disgusting. Do they belong to a church where the pastor knew they were gay? USE that church or hold a gravesite service at the cemetery.
Yea, that ain’t right. Pastor doright needs to really think about whos shoes he’s trying to fill here. Comfort the broken heart. Why it matter whos.
Bless this family and hope they can find more love and forgiveness in their hearts than pastor brimstone there.
Their church, their rules. Still, if a convicted murderer had died, would they bury him? God hates murder, too.
I suppose if an adulterer’s obituary said that he leaves a wife, a long-time mistress, and Sherry Bops, his favorite t...y bar dancer, the church might decline to bury a reprobate.
I find homosexuality a huge sin and on a personal note, disgusting. However, to cancel at the wake is a bit harsh.....certainly they could have waited until after the wake and speak to them privately. Or the church could have called somewhere else to have the funeral. The ONLY thing negative about this story is the timing. I agree with the Church fully.
Given enough time, Capers may eventually come to comprehend that his and the deceased loved ones family's attempt to deliberately trick a church into holding a funeral ceremony, was even more “disrespectful and wrong” than the last minute cancellation by the church.
He, and probably some others, will continue to think he was the injured party due to the last minute religious ceremony cancellation.
10% of our population is left handed.
About 5% is red headed.
Less than 3% identify as “gay” (CDC).
I don’t care what consenting adults do in their bedroom. I do care about the radical homosexual agenda and it’s harm to our culture. I want my grandkids to know that marriage and biology call for a man and a woman to create life. Period.
That said, it’s up to the church leader to decide if they perform funerals for homosexuals. No different than the Colorado bakers who refused to supply their labor for a gay wedding.
No. The church could not accommodate a homosexual "spouse" and still honor God. There wasn't a problem until it was revealed that he was "married". They could not honor a relationship that is outside of God's law. There would have been a mess had they refused to acknowledge the "husband". They did the right thing.
2. Why the push to have this man's funeral at a church that (as far as can be assumed from the article) he never attended, nor believed its teachings?
2. Other than Catholic funeral masses, I've never attended nor even heard of funeral services being held in a church. They are done at the funeral home.
I must disagree that the pastor did the right thing here. I am as conservative as one can get theologically, but this is not the role of a minister to refuse ministering to those who weep. They were not asking him to accept homosexuality nor promote it. The man is dead. Churches minister to the grieving no matter what their background. Jesus ministered to sinners. He didn’t condone their sin, but He never refused to reach out to any that were hurting.
The Pastor’s refusal was a mistake. He had a chance to show God’s love to the living, to present the Gospel to the lost. It is not his job to condemn the dead - God is the one who judges, not us. Nothing this pastor does or doesn’t do will affect the dead man’s eternal destination, but what he does or doesn’t do will affect the living and their view of the love and mercy of God.
Had they made a focus of their son’s homosexuality and wanted the pastor to endorse it, that would be different. But, that is not the case as far as the information given in the article.
I sense your devotion to God and His holiness, and I pray that I strive for the same thing. We may not agree, but I felt compelled to give my view.
“By allowing the service, he accepts the sin of the homosexual.”
Not at all.
We all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Otherwise, why would we need a Saviour?
Are you so confident that the young man has committed an unpardonable, unforgivable sin in the eyes of the Lord? You know for a fact that this sinner cannot be and has not been forgiven for his choices?
The Preacher will answer for his own decisions, as will we all, whether or not our Christianity is grounded in the Word or not.
The family should have handled this issue at the time they requested use of the church...
“By not holding a funeral for this man, the pastor is showing a very unforgiving, judgmental attitude.
We all sin. Will we not hold funerals for adulterers and alcoholics?”
I will gently disagree.
The family apparently did not inform the church that the son was gay and had a “husband” who is a survivor. They read it in the obit.
As such, it was a “gay funeral.”
I don’t disagree with the church. They were blindsided. Obviously the family knew everything and never told the church. They should have. To disagree is not unforgiving or judgmental.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.