Skip to main content

The Pains of Grief // Jackson Riddle

 Pain is an uncomfortable experience, but nothing trumps a pain of the heart. Grief-stricken hearts filled with sorrow and loss easily surpass any other pain one may experience, and often overwhelm the bearer to the point where they're unable to act, or in some cases bring out other emotions like anger or regret. Oftentimes with such deep emotions we try pushing them aside, doing other stuff to take our focus off of our sorrow. Such is the case with Achilles and his Achaean comrades as they work through the grief of Patroclus' death, a close friend of many of the men in the army, specifically Achilles. Instead of grieving and moving on, Achilles decides to hold "funeral games" to honor his parted friend, and the Achaean army compete in archery tournaments, chariot racing, and other sports. While we don't hold funeral games nowadays for loved ones who have passed, we still grieve and mourn for them with a deep passion. My question is this: why, as Christians, do we often mourn a loss and hold onto it for so long afterwards? As followers of Christ we believe in Heaven, and so instead of a loss being a sad experience, we ought to view it as a joyful one, because that person that we loved so much (if they also accepted Christ before their death,) has moved in to Heaven. I understand that we miss that person and miss the interactions we had with them, but to go so far as to hold funeral games like Achilles? It just seems like a bit much for one person.


PS: I commented on Clabo's post and Haylee Lynd's post. :)

Comments

  1. I agree with your opinion on how we should view the passing of someone who was firm in their faith and identity in Christ. However, Achilles believed in a much different system of judgement where one's soul could either make the afterlife cut, or be sentenced to an unimaginable amount of pain for eternity. I believe the funeral games were how the Achaeans let their grief for someone go, it allows them to honor and then move on from the death.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Lovers of Wisdom, Not Power—Lily Caswell

In Book VIII of Plato’s Republic, Socrates talks about the possibility of having a well-governed city. However, he also talks about how that particular form of government is impossible to have. A well-governed city becomes a possibility only if you can discover a better way of life for your future rulers than holding office.” (Plato, p 215) Maybe his version of a better life was for those in office to not be lovers of power, since it would then become a fight among rival lovers. Socrates gets to the point that the only rulers who don’t love power are true philosophers. Philosophers are lovers of wisdom and knowledge and not power, ergo they are the perfect rulers. Absolute power corrupts and power corrupts absolutely, so I’m thinking that maybe the trick to being a good ruler is for you to be a philosophical person who loves wisdom and not power. I commented on Jamie’s and Isabelle’s posts.

Oedipus’ Children/Siblings—Lily Caswell

Ok, so Oedipus is a bit of a train wreck to say the least. I love the fact that even after Oedipus found out about his less-than-appealing relationship with his mother, he still tried to look after his children/siblings. After he gouged his eyes out, his children came to him at which point Oedipus talked about how that when they were old enough to marry, no one would want them due to them being products of incest. He said for the people not to condemn them based on what their father had done. Even after he knew what he had done and what his children were, he still wanted the best for them. I commented on Logan’s and Ian’s posts.

Dystopian Origins Uncovered ////// Isabelle Ferguson

  I think that ideas eventually run out of originality and circle back to the original idea. During this week's reading, many of Socrates’ suggestions for a place of perfection reminded me of some novels I’ve read depicting dystopian worlds. Disclaimer: There are spoilers ahead. You have been warned.        To begin, in  The  Giver  by Lois Lowry censorship is a major theme. The novel is centered around a boy who is receiving memories withheld from the population! The government in The Giver is especially careful to censor the memories that may cause strife, anger, fear, sadness, etc. In the adults, this society is cemented. So, the government is especially strict with the youth. Socrates talks about verses to “obliterate” to prevent the descriptions from doing “harm to our future warriors” for the better half of Book III (Plato, page 44). The warriors he speaks of are the youth. He goes on to list the multitude of verses that should be done ...