I read in one post that sociopathy is - or probably is - a mental illness. I think it is dangerous to call certain tendencies toward evil “mental illness”. A child under 7 may not have the ability to truly know right from wrong, but all, or most, others do. Mental illness, i feel, can interfere with a person’s… well, it can interfere with anything… but it can’t FORCE a person to do evil. The scriptures are very clear that those who choose evil and refuse to repent will end up in Hell. I think psychology often tends to complicate matters and make excuses for people’s behavior where God, apparently, does not. Of course, God is the ultimate judge & we never know how He sees things… All we have to go by is His Word, as expressed in Scripture and the Church…(plus what the Holy Spirit reveals to us, but who can prove such things absolutely?). It seems that no one wants to believe in eternal Hell anymore - its supposedly “not loving” to believe in such a horrible place. But in saying that, we are saying, in effect, that the Word (& justice) of God is un-loving. It then follows that God is not truly loving or just. Jesus said very clearly that whatever we do to the least of his brethren, we do to Him… and in the end of that passage, He speaks not of just punishment for those who don’t care for his brethren [Purgatory], but ETERNAL punishment… (Hell) (Matthew 25:31-46).
Sometimes we have to choose between psychology and God’s word…
Saying that a sociopath has a mental illness doesn’t negate Hell, it only acknowledges that God alone can judge a person’s heart. I’m sure there there is a method he uses to judge them, but only he knows that and we hope for his mercy, just as we do for ourselves.
Also, we are not born with a conscious as you know it. When a child is born they do not know right from wrong, they only know pain and pleasure. Being feed brings pleasure, being wet - pain. One thing a child of this age needs is holding by the parent, so that they learn that physical contact and closeness brings pleasure.
They remain in this stage until about the age of two when they start developing shame. A two year old doesn’t feel guilt when they perform a misdeed, but they do feel shame at being caught. It’s not until they reach the age of reason that they’ve truly developed guilt.
But this is all contingent on being properly trained. If not given the proper care as an infant the child distorts the pleasure and pain to pleasure being “what I want” and pain being “what I don’t want”. They learn that physical touch is bad and teach themselves not to want it, thereby making it physically painful to get a hug.
Then when they reach shame, they have no bond with the mother so being caught produces no effect of shame on them. They often get pleasure (and pleasure is what counts remember) from seeing the mother get upset they reinforced in their negative thinking. If they have no shame, they never develop guilt over their actions.
Now there is something of a conscious that is innate within us, which enables us to develop past the stage of two when all other animals remain at that emotional stage. Since not all institutionalized or abused children end up this way, there must be another factor to take into account. We only vaguely know the state of our own souls and I say vaguely because so often we delude ourselves into thinking we’re not all that bad. It’s easy to see the actions of others and not to take into account upbringing and knowledge.
Remember a sin is only a sin if the person KNOWS that it is wrong to do and chooses to do it with DELIBERATE CONSENT. They may intellectually know that an action is wrong, but feel that they have no choice but to commit the action. To do the good would be so physically painful that they would fear it as death itself.
As I said before, this doesn’t negate the possibility of Hell, and, in fact, it might be a more pleasant place for them if they were completely incapable of appreciating Good. In the end I pray for them, that the Lord will truly be merciful to them, whatever that will mean.
