Both Holland's and Idle's passages have their merits, but overall I dislike the apparent agenda and effect of Christopher Idle's alternative passage. Idle's passage tells me that death can only be processed or understood within the context of Christian belief. It reinforces a puritanical, almost medieval view of life that says for humans, life is fleeting and ephemeral, and lacks meaning except so far as it serves and honors God. In Idle's passage, Death (with a capital D) is anthropomorphosized as a negative, powerful being that works on us all; Idle seems to deify death, at least partially--though God's promise of heavenly redemption overpowers Death in the end. Between this and Holland's passage, I prefer Holland's. I dislike Idle's passage because it serves Idle's agenda of reinforcing his version of Christianity more than it offers comfort to the grieving, which in my opinion is more needed when death comes. We know that after someone dies, family and friends will certainly be grieving; they will feel lost, scared, alone and powerless, unsure of how to continue with their lives. At this time, the grieving don't need a sermon and an exhortation to hurry up and get right with the wrathful, Judgement-Day God of the Old Testament. They need comfort, and within the Christian context, reassurance that death is but a passage to the welcoming love of Jesus from the New Testament. Idle should have focused on that, which it seems is most important when people are hurting. Thank you for the opportunity to share my thoughts.
Both Holland's and Idle's passages have their merits, but overall I dislike the apparent agenda and effect of Christopher Idle's alternative passage. Idle's passage tells me that death can only be processed or understood within the context of Christian belief. It reinforces a puritanical, almost medieval view of life that says for humans, life is fleeting and ephemeral, and lacks meaning except so far as it serves and honors God. In Idle's passage, Death (with a capital D) is anthropomorphosized as a negative, powerful being that works on us all; Idle seems to deify death, at least partially--though God's promise of heavenly redemption overpowers Death in the end. Between this and Holland's passage, I prefer Holland's. I dislike Idle's passage because it serves Idle's agenda of reinforcing his version of Christianity more than it offers comfort to the grieving, which in my opinion is more needed when death comes. We know that after someone dies, family and friends will certainly be grieving; they will feel lost, scared, alone and powerless, unsure of how to continue with their lives. At this time, the grieving don't need a sermon and an exhortation to hurry up and get right with the wrathful, Judgement-Day God of the Old Testament. They need comfort, and within the Christian context, reassurance that death is but a passage to the welcoming love of Jesus from the New Testament. Idle should have focused on that, which it seems is most important when people are hurting. Thank you for the opportunity to share my thoughts.