Is Christian theology should people who do evil things, yet have congenital (bi-polar,schizophrenia etc) mental disabilities get a “get into heaven free” card because their evil acts were caused by organic predispositions they had no control over?
No, because “heaven” isn’t an actual place.
Unfortunately, this depends on your brand of Christianity. Some say that if you’re baptized and believe, it doesn’t matter what you do (or whether or not you’re crazy). Some say that it’s what you do, and being baptized is just a Good Thing, so wouldn’t counteract all the bad in this case (crazy notwithstanding). Some have some sort of combination. Others do indeed have a “to whom much is given…” clause, implying that to whom little is given, little is expected. And so on, and so on.
The only judge fit to decide if a person is “well”, and whether or not that applies is, theologically, God.
The Bible isn’t real clear on this point.
Well there was that bit about casting demons out. That sort of implied that it’s possible to not be in control of one’s body.
And what I’m having right here is an incomplete George Carlin flashback. He did a bit about sin, early on. He recited the list of what had to be present for the Catholic Church to consider an act a mortal sin. I’m only remembering part of it. Something like: “sufficient reflection and full concent of the will.” The next lines were:
“You had to WAAANNA. In fact, WAAANNA was a sin all by itself.”
Can anyone remember the rest of the phrase and did George get it right?
The “lyrics” to George Carlin’s The Confessional are here.
Did he get it right? I suppose so. There is sin in the intent to sin (a la the lust in your heart and you’ve already committed adultery). I’m not sure crazy people have intent to do the wrong thing. It probably depends on the kind of crazy they are.
Maybe they go to Fools’ Paradise.
Really good question!
bjbrashier did a good job summing up the controversy.
Other options:
Some Catholics, Orthodox & like-minded Protestants may see this as a job for Purgatory (RCC), the aeriel toll-houses (EOC) or the Interim State (Protty).
Armstrongist Church of God folk, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and Mormons would all agree that such souls would be healed of their mental illness and resurrected either during or after the Millenium as mortals to get another opportunity.
New Agey believers might say they get their opportunity through reincarnation.
I lean to the first two. I don’t totally rule out reincarnation but I can’t affirm it either.
If we’re mentioning New Agers, can other theologies apply?
Please do!
which is why “yes” is an equally acceptable and supportable answer.
I’m pretty familiar with Mormonism, and I’ve never heard that belief. Maybe there was some vague statement like that a hundred years ago, but if so it has been completely forgotten by the LDS faithful today. There is no hint of reincarnation in modern LDS doctrine.
I think it would be more accurate to say that most Mormons believe a person’s actions will be weighed along with his ability to choose Good vs Evil. This means that people who are totally ignorant of Mormon morals won’t be judged too harshly for failing to comply, and AFAIK it also applies to those who aren’t mentally capable of recognizing morals.
OK, I misspoke there. I was thinking of the three levels- the teletial, terrestrial & celestial & I misinterpreted the lowest one as being into back into mortality. Also, I forgot about what might be happening while they are in Spirit Prison, which may be where such curative work is done.
In general, based on what I know of Jewish law, I would say an insane person is held unaccountable for their actions.
For instance, like many religions, Judaism considers suicide a bad thing. Technically speaking, a suicide should be buried in a different part of the cemetery, and not be formally mourned. The practice, though, is to assume the deceased had a temporarily fit of insanity. A person who is depressed or emotionally unstable is not responsible for their actions. good cite
Another relevant area is a mentally disabled person. The afflicted individual is exempt from all responsibility. another good cite
As regards to less severe impairment… it gets tricky. There’s a reason why “Ask your local Orthodox rabbi” is a catchphrase in so many classes. Aside from the “three Jews, three opinions” thing, the number of texts, references, legal minutia, and the like makes it hard to say anything from a layman’s perspective, just like I’d be hard-pressed to tell you how the computer guy repaired my disk drive.
Culpability is a complex thing is halacha. Germaine to the discussion is how accidental an accident really is. I forget what the term is for something that’s totally not your fault, but that would be the catagory for the cases above. Then there’s shogeg, a negligent accident. Running over someone because your car hit a patch of black ice is a true accident; running someone over because you’re drunk is shogeg.
A shogeg case may be a violent schizophrenic who doesn’t take his medicine because he never got around to filling out the prescription. He doesn’t intend to hurt anyone, he’s just lazy. But he still bears some responsibility when he goes on a stabbing spree because he thinks the neighbors are pod people.
Definately Ask-Your-Local-Orthodox-Rabbi territory.
One final conundrum is the person who has a personality change due to brain damage. The person might seem to be functioning, she can still walk and talk and do business, but all of the sudden she’s become abusive, nasty, violent, negligent… I’ve actually been wondering about this sort of thing myself. I’m probably not getting answers, though (and neither are you) because this sort of case is so dependent on the individual circumstances that it can’t be answered hypothetically.
As I was taught (I went to Catholic school), the church generally teaches that if you’re not really in control of your actions (to be blunt, “insane”), you really can’t be held accountable. They’ve also been easing off of the Purgatory stuff.
Suicide, for example, is no longer seen as the grave sin it used to be, since we now know more about depression and mental illness. So I think the church would recognize mental illness and go from there. Is there person responsible for their actions, if they’re not in control? That’s what it comes down to.
:rolleyes:
What the hell does this have to do with the OP? He’s not asking for a factual question, as if heaven REALLY EXISTS, as I understand it, but what the theology and beliefs of different religions are. So way to threadshit!
Hmmmm…so Hitler, who was obviously “insane”, could be held unaccountable for his actions? And under Jewish law, too? How ironic.
But the question would be whether he was always insane to the point of diagnosable mental incompetence, when certain decisions were taken. At least to an outside observer it would seem he was not always at that level or at the point of being unable to comprehend the consequences of his actions.
Anyway, if the law about your ultimate fate in a given religion says that those mentally incompetent are not accountable, then it says they aren’t. Same as if some other religion says everyone who truly repents and converts is saved, then it says they are. Divine Justice, under the supposition of the JudeoChristian God who is above all, would not have to operate by human justice standards and would not be accountable to public opinion.
Raised Catholic, we were always told that God takes care of children and fools. Whether or not it’s true, it made me sleep a little better at night.
“Obviously insane”? Sure, he had issues, but he knew what he was doing. He was competent enough to create a police state, lead a war, and set up complex death camps. Towards the end he was pretty out of it (probably due to drugs), but he had millions of murders under his belt by then.
Why is it that every time religion is mentioned on this board, someone has to come in for no other purpose than to shit all over the thread?
The OP clearly states that they are looking for an answer according to “Christian theology” at the beginning of their post. It makes no difference whether or not you, I, or indeed the OP, believes here is or is not a heaven. The question asks what the position would be in Christian theology. Nobody gives a rat’s ass what you think about religion, as it’s absolutely irrelevant.
As for the question asked in the OP…
If someone is truly mentally disabled to the point that they cannot tell right from wrong, then there is no way for them to sin. In fact, I recall one of the local priest once saying that it is not possible for a person to commit a sin if they truly believe that what they are doing is correct, no matter what their actual act may be.
Of course, the kicker in that last sentence is ‘truly believe’…and the only ones who truly know what’s in your heart are you, and God. I think this goes hand-in-hand with the idea that no matter what sins you have committed, they are all instantly and completely forgiven simply by repenting…but only you and God know if you are *truly *repentant…