Mental Disability

This is an abridged correspondence between my weakness and Fr. Gregory regarding the salvation of mentally disabled people. The discussion is still open, please feel free to join us, we appreciate your comments.

remember my weakness in your prayers.

On Fri Jan 14th, Shenoda wrote:

Aghaby Fr. Gregory,

I recently found myself facing this question: Salvation is by believing in Jesus Christ. Where does believe or faith rests in me, my heart, my brain, my thoughts, my spirit, my soul, or... ? Wherever, I *choose* to believe and hence I am saved. Right?

Then, what about mentally disabled people, especially those born in another religion, say Islam? How could they be saved?

...I wonder if the church has an opinion though.

remember my sinfulness in your prayers.

+ + +

On Tue Jan 18th, Fr. Gregory replied:

The Lord bless you!

Shenoda,

You raise very good questions for which I'm not sure there are satisfying answers! But let me try and see if I can at least bring some light to bear on your concerns.

(1) The fathers talk about the nous--sometimes translated as "mind" but really closer to "heart" in the spiritual rather than physiological sense. Nous is the deepest part of the person where God dwells and speaks to him

(2) True obedience to God, and so salvation, is therefore not external to the person but internal. I am obedient from the deepest part of myself. Unfortunately because of sin I often live not from the deepest part of myself but only on the surface--and often not even there but pushed and pulled by forces external to myself. This is what asceticism--prayer, fasting, almsgiving but also confession and the sacraments--is so important. Through ascetical struggle I return to myself, I learn to dwell in the stillness of my own heart and, once there, I learn to hear the voice of God.

(3) This is true not simply for those of us who are Christians but all human beings. God dwells in the deepest place of each person's heart--speaking quietly, gently inviting, wooing really, the person to return to himself. If this journey is hard for the Christian, it is all the harder for those who do not know Christ and who suffer from wrong beliefs about God, the creation and themselves.

While not discounting the intellect or the visible works of the ascetical life, the real work of salvation is internal. People with mental or physical disabilities may not be able to express what they are experiencing in the depths of their hearts (even to themselves) but this doesn't mean that God is not active in them.

Unfortunately, we have become evermore accustomed to thinking even about faith in merely empirical terms. We forget that not everything which we know, we know from the senses. The work of grace in the human heart falls into the category of things we know but not through the senses. Rather what we know by faith we know from within ourselves--and to the degree that we have learned to dwell in our own hearts we are able to recognize God's work in the hearts of others.

Finally, whenever we look at another human being, or even ourselves, we should never despair for their (or our own) salvation. Rather than looking at all the reasons why someone is far from Christ, we should look at God' superabundant love for each and every human being. So the answer to your questions is this--don't discount science or the senses. But don't value these more than the love of God and His desire to draw all men to Himself.

In Christ,

+FrG

+ + +

On Mon Jan 24th, Shenoda followed up:

...

(1) Does that mean that the definition of the nous is different in theology (or spirituality) than it is in psychology? That should never be the case, right?
But at any rate, I guess I get the idea. Like, while thoughts dwell in the mind (physically, the brain's electricity), feelings are always referred to being dwelling in the heart. Of course it is not the physical organ, so, I guess this is the nous? Or may be nous is yet another "place" where God dwells?

...

(2) makes sense (that obedience is not external to me). However, when does my will play a role? Where does my will dwells also? And how is it related to thoughts and the mind? And, hence, where and what is the will of the mentally disabled people?
And yet, where and when does faith come to the picture? If God is speaking in my nous, and I need to "answer" back negatively or positively, what part of me that responds?

...

(3) This statement [People with mental or physical disabilities may not be able to express what they are experiencing in the depths of their hearts (even to themselves) but this doesn't mean that God is not active in them.] helped me a lot. Indeed as I recall the mentally disabled people that I ran by, like cashier or such, I always feel pity and sour, but I also feel and see as if they are not really disabled, but just that we can not understand them, and hence that they are alone and lonely (and that is where pity mostly comes from)... I recall many times I imagined myself getting married to a mentally or physically disabled person, just because I see the beauty of human creature, beyond the physical attractiveness (that was a while ago though). So, I kind of see what you are referring to that God is active in them, and that they are not able to express themselves.

+ + +

On Wed Jan 26th, Fr. Gregory responded:

(1) Psychology, as an empirical science, is not concerned with the nous as such but only with those aspects of human life that lend themselves to quantitative analysis. The nous is both a pre- and trans-scientific of talking about human behavior.

As pre-scientific, the nous helps remind us that there is something enduring in the ebb and flow of human behavior and the various shifts we see in personality over time and in different situations. Think the nous as the "integrating center" of the person.

As a trans-scientific concept, the nous helps us organize and evaluate the different aspects of human behavior that the psychologist studies. To use your example,the relationship between brain activity and thought is not causal but correlative. Yes, when I am angry a certain part of my brain lights up under an MRi--but that physiological is not anger. Nor can it be associated with anger without the intervention of a human person who tells me, "Now I'm feeling angry" while the MRI highlights brain activity.

Understanding the nous also helps us understand, as I said above, the relative human weight of behavior and emotions. What I mean by this is that while as a psychologist (or personally) I might be prone think that anger is the most important thing in the life of a person. Thinking about anger in terms of the nous, I realize however that while anger is real it is secondary, derivative really, and that is love which is most basic to the human person. And anger? It is a distortion of love.

Again, the nous as a construct is both its pre- and trans-scientific and it helps us keep in balance the often conflicting empirical data of psychology

(2) Terms like "will" and "nous" while they are often helpful in analysis of human behavior in a general sense, are less helpful when dealing with concrete questions such as the ones you ask here. My will as such doesn't dwell anywhere; the will isn't like my liver for example. Rather "will" like "nous" is a way of trying to express the mysterious relationship between God and the human person.

I hear God, and I call that hearing the nous; I respond (or not) to God and I call that responding the will. When we talk about a "darkened" nous or a "corrupted" will these are not physical realities bit spiritual that we stumble to express with physical imagery.

This is what makes the relationship between contemporary psychology and the mystical tradition of the Church such an interesting area of study. Both psychology and the fathers are trying to understand what it means to be human.

While both are concerned with the human person and do so with intellectual rigor, they approach their study with different methodologies and analogies. In the main, psychology tends to think of the human person mechanistically--as if we were machines or computers--while the fathers think of the person organically. The former expresses its findings empirically--borrowing heavily from physics--the latter express their findings poetically, borrowing from the Scriptures and ancient literature. Again, this doesn't mean that they are necessarily opposed to each other. It does however mean we need to sort through the differences and similarities with great care.

As for a book, let me suggest Christopher Jamison's Finding Happiness. A Catholic monk, Fr Christopher shows a keen understanding of the Church fathers, especially St John Cassian, and I think will help you think about some of what we've discussed here.

In Christ,

+FrG