John Chrysostom
It is entirely appropriate to honor those who are deserving after their passing; indeed, it is even more fitting to do so following a death marked by a crown, characterized by a confession of faith that is free from guile. If there are those who have been deemed blessed even in death, how much more can we say that many who have perished in a manner such as this are worthy of the same title? Who exactly designated the merely deceased as blessed? It was Solomon, the wise king himself. Let us not overlook this figure; rather, let us reflect on who he was, how he conducted his life, and the contentment with which he enjoyed a life of ease and leisure. He indulged in all forms of pleasure, explored various avenues of intellectual satisfaction, and sought out countless delights.
Read more (173 words)
In recounting his experiences, he stated: “I built myself houses; I planted vineyards for myself; I made gardens and orchards; I constructed reservoirs to water my groves; I acquired servants and maidens, and I had household servants; I possessed herds and flocks; I amassed silver and gold in abundance, as well as treasures of every kind; I employed singers and musician” (Eccl. 2:4-8). With such immense wealth and myriad pleasures at his disposal, what does he conclude? “And I found that the dead, who are already gone, are more fortunate than the living; but even more blessed than both is the one who has not yet been born.” The one who critiques pleasures is undeniably credible when making such assertions. Should someone who has endured hardship and deprivation voice similar sentiments against pleasure, it might be interpreted that they do so out of ignorance rather than true understanding. However, when the critique comes from one who has experienced all these pleasures firsthand and scrutinized their paths, the judgment cannot be called into question.