Mormon,Mormonism Freedom to Choose, But Who Is Responsible?

Latter-day Saints often think of agency as the freedom to commit a sin or not. However, science is beginning to show that we may need to think of agency in a slightly different way.

Research at the University of Pennsylvania School of Nursing shows that "the seeds of violence may be planted before a child is born".

Recent research demonstrates a biological basis of crime, says Dr. Liu. "'Biological' does not mean only genetic factors," she explains, "but also health factors, such as nutritional deficiency and lead exposure, which influence biological processes."

Dr. Liu's study emphasizes the prenatal, perinatal, and postnatal periods, which are critical times for both a child's neuro-development and for environmental modifications.

The article points out that the most important times for development of the brain are in the first 36 months (age 3). This has important implications for LDS, because the church teaches that children are not held accountable by God for their actions until they reach the age of accountability, which is defined by church leaders as age 8.

Listen to the words of Christ, your Redeemer, your Lord and your God. Behold, I came into the world not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance; the whole need no physician, but they that are sick; wherefore, little children are whole, for they are not capable of committing sin; wherefore the curse of Adam is taken from them in me, that it hath no power over them; and the law of circumcision is done away in me. (Moroni 8:8)

That is, young children are not capable of making intelligent decisions about things; "mistakes" they make are not considered "sins" by the Lord, and the Atonement cleanses the children (in terms of their eternal salvation).

The dilemma facing Latter-day Saints is that if children undergo brain and emotional development before age 8, a just God would not punish them for actions after age 8 that were conditioned by their development before age 8 (and even development before birth). This is counter to the common belief of LDS that all acts after age 8 may be sin. I have been concerned about this for years, because people are born into conditions that predispose them to committing acts of sin later on. I remember, while living in Phoenix, reading about burglaries that were committed by parents while their children were in their automobile as they cruised neighborhoods looking for houses that were not occupied at that moment. Perhaps the children even helped the parents enter the houses and remove objects. These children were being taught by the actions of their parents that it is OK to steal from others.

I resolved this dilemma by believing that we are judged by God for the decisions we make and the actions we perform after age 8, but we are not judged by God for the conditions we lived in prior to age 8. After reading about this research from the University of Pennsylvania, I've extended my beliefs to include that we are not judged by God for the physiological and psychological development we have as children under age 8. That is, our agency involves how we react to conditions we are under when we aren't responsible for our being under those conditions. Those children in Phoenix weren't responsible for participating in burglaries, and I believe they won't be held responsible for their participation in the burglaries, but they will be held responsible for their actions after they become old enough to understand "right" from "wrong" and to defy, if necessary, their parents who want them to help with the burglaries. They may have been born into homes in which stealing was considered OK; they may have experienced physiological and psychological changes as children that predisposed them to creating acts of crime, but the Atonement removes the effects of their acts of crime that were committed while they were under age 8. This is, of course, just my personal belief and doesn't necessarily reflect LDS church doctrine.

Another example of a dilemma about agency is that of homosexual members of the church. For many years, some church leaders took the position that homosexuality was a matter of choice and not of biological reasons. However, homosexuality among animals is documented in the scientific literature, and I think this implies there may be a biological factor in homosexuality. This presents a dilemma for the church leaders who say homosexuality is only a matter of choice. It is a science dilemma because the views of church leaders may disagree with science, and it is a theological dilemma because many people say a just God wouldn't punish a person for something that wasn't a factor of his or her choice. In recent years, President Gordon B. Hinckley said the sin is not in having feelings of homosexuality but in having sexual relations outside the bonds of marriage, as the church defines marriage. That is, the Lord will not punish people for having feelings of homosexuality, but the Lord will punish persons who act on their feelings in ways that transgress the boundaries given by the Lord for sexual activity. The Lord expects the same limitations on their actions by homosexuals as he does of non-married heterosexuals.

Let me repeat the conclusion I have come to, because that conclusion answers for me questions about the justice of God: I believe that when we become responsible for our actions, God will hold us responsible for how we react to influences in our lives when we weren't responsible for those influences. We may, through no actions of our own, live in an environment that conditions us to accept sin as "normal", but God won't hold us for accountable for being in those conditions and for our actions as children under age 8 that result from those conditions. He will hold us responsible for how we react to those conditions after we are old enough to be held responsible for our actions. In the case of the children in Phoenix, God will, I believe, recognize the influence of their parents while they were children, and he will recognize how those influences have influenced the physiological and psychological growth of the children. He will recognize how well the children have been taught right from wrong. He will recognize how capable the children were after age 8 to choose right from wrong, and he will judge accordingly. As law enforcement and legal officials of society, as Priesthood and auxiliary leaders in the church, we have to judge people about their membership in society and in the church. Fortunately, we don't have to judge people about their eternal salvation, for we don't understand enough about people to be just judges in the eternal sense.