Paneloux

     For this blog post, I want to examine Paneloux’s two sermons and how his beliefs change during the epidemic of plague that strikes Oran.

              One thing that struck me about the sermons was that the second one seemed to be so much more extreme than the first one, and to me it kind of seems like he may have started doubting his religion. I know that not everyone will agree with me on this, so feel free to reject my points and provide your own views in the comments. I’m actually really interested to see what discussion this blog post generates.

              Anyway, in the first sermon, he comes across as quite sure of his belief and where his relationship with God stands. He addresses the people as “you”, implying that he does not feel that he is a part of the general community and feels quite safe because he has dedicated himself to God wholeheartedly by becoming a priest. Additionally, he speaks quite loudly and clearly, bringing his point across so clearly that the whole church kneels. He sees it as fair that “sinners” are killed off by the plague because “He will thresh out His harvest until wheat is separated from the chaff” (95). Overall, all his reasoning adds up; if a person sinned and did not build up his relationship with God, he/she deserved the plague for relying on repentance and the occasional visit to church.

              However, when he delivers the second sermon, it is soon after the painful death of an innocent child, and that leaves him with many questions that he struggled to answer. Why would God kill off an innocent child? Is an eternity of bliss enough to compensate for a moment of pain? Because of this, he is much less sure of himself when he delivers the second sermon. He stumbles over his words and addresses the crowd as “we” instead of “you”. This small shift shows that he is no longer sure of his relationship with God; if an innocent child can be killed off then what stops God from killing off him or some other seemingly faithful believer? To compensate for this, he adopts a black and white view of things; either you accept everything God does without question or you give up your faith. In my opinion, this is also partially due to Paneloux having doubts about his faith. Paneloux clearly seemed to think God would spare Jacques at first (“My God, spare this child” (217)), and seeing that he didn’t, generated all those questions which he could not answer. In general, people adopt much more strict policies after they feel that they have done something wrong, and in my opinion, while he was still trying to find answers to his questions, he may have questioned his faith, leading to his dramatic conclusion that priests should not consult doctors because that would go against God’s will; this ridiculous explanation is the only way he could reconcile his beliefs with the human part of himself that saw children’s deaths as wrong. Ultimately, Paneloux did not abandon his faith, as shown by his insistence on not seeing doctors and clutching a crucifix as he was dying, but he chose to explain his faith in an absurd way.

Comments

  1. erin's blogNovember 27, 2020 at 7:38 AM

    I saw Paneloux's choice as a type of suicide. I think he was worried that if he witnessed too much suffering and seemingly meaningless death, his faith would come into further question and he would lose his grip. His extreme, black-and-white philosophy was a coping mechanism in response to the doubt he was feeling, and his last acts (refusing treatment/accepting death) was him trying to prove himself to God and also to prove God to himself, if that makes sense.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

War, Men, and Toxic Masculinity in The Sun Also Rises

Image
  Like the characters in Mrs. Dalloway, all the people in The Sun Also Rises have been affected by World War I, and they all deal with it in different ways. In this blog post, I would like to explore how the war affected the male characters, mainly Jake, the count, and Robert.   Firstly, we can look at Jake, the narrator and the character we get to know the most. By common sense, we should have gotten to know him quite well since we’re inside his head all the time, but it feels like we know him only at the surface level. Whenever he is at a party, he internally comments on what other people do and say, and when he talks to people, he gives only one-word answers. He never describes his feelings, and it seems like he’s more of an onlooker for most events rather than an active participant. This may largely be due to his injury, which our class decided caused him to be unable to have sex. Although this injury is not visible, it seems to cause him to lose confidence, ...
Read more

The Mezzanine: A Strange Novel

Image
This reminded me of Howie's comment about handrails (page 100). This cartoon even mentions the slippage!   What makes The Mezzanine interesting? Is it even a novel? These are two questions that came up throughout our discussions of The Mezzanine that I would like to discuss. First of all, let’s address the question of interest. The Mezzanine is set apart from other books by the observant narrator, Howie. Although it looks like he’s just like any other person from the outside, the book lets us see what Howie is like inside, and it shows us all the strange reflections Howie thinks about throughout the day, similar to how a stream of consciousness works (although not quite). This over-analyzation of simple things that most people don’t think twice about seems to be one of the main reasons why people read this book. It inspires them to look closer at things and wonder. In a way, Howie is almost like a child because he constantly asks “How does this work?”. Also, people might...
Read more