What is to be thought of sudden death? It is remarkable that, in
different conditions of society, it has been variously regarded as the
consummation of an earthly career most fervently to be desired, and
on the other hand, as that consummation which is most of all to be
deprecated. Cæsar the Dictator, at his last dinner-party (_cæna_), and
the very evening before his assassination, being questioned as to the
mode of death which, in _his_ opinion, might seem the most eligible,
replied, “That which should be most sudden.” On the other hand, the
divine Litany of our English Church, when breathing forth supplications,
as if in some representative character for the whole human race prostrate
before God, places such a death in the very van of horrors. “From
lightning and tempest; from plague, pestilence, and famine; from battle
and murder, and from sudden death,—_Good Lord, deliver us_.” Sudden death
is here made to crown the climax in a grand ascent of calamities; it is
the last of curses; and yet, by the noblest of Romans, it was treated
as the first of blessings. In that difference, most readers will see
little more than the difference between Christianity and Paganism. But
there I hesitate. The Christian Church may be right in its estimate of
sudden death; and it is a natural feeling, though after all it may also
be an infirm one, to wish for a quiet dismissal from life,—as that which
_seems_ most reconcilable with meditation, with penitential retrospects,
and with the humilities of farewell prayer. There does not, however,
occur to me any direct Scriptural warrant for this earnest petition
of the English Litany. It seems rather a petition indulged to human
infirmity, than exacted from human piety. And, however _that_ may be, two
remarks suggest themselves as prudent restraints upon a doctrine, which
else _may_ wander, and _has_ wandered, into an uncharitable superstition.
The first is this: that many people are likely to exaggerate the horror
of a sudden death (I mean the objective horror to him who contemplates
such a death, not the subjective horror to him who suffers it), from the
false disposition to lay a stress upon words or acts, simply because by
an accident they have become words or acts. If a man dies, for instance,
by some sudden death when he happens to be intoxicated, such a death is
falsely regarded with peculiar horror; as though the intoxication were
suddenly exalted into a blasphemy. But _that_ is unphilosophic. The man
was, or he was not, _habitually_ a drunkard. If not, if his intoxication
were a solitary accident, there can be no reason at all for allowing
special emphasis to this act, simply because through misfortune it became
his final act. Nor, on the other hand, if it were no accident, but one
of his _habitual_ transgressions, will it be the more habitual or the
more a transgression, because some sudden calamity, surprising him, has
caused this habitual transgression to be also a final one? Could the man
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account