Guilt in Charles Brockden Browns’ Wieland Essay -- Charles Brockden Br

Guilt in Charles Brockden Browns’ Wieland There are many ways to decide what makes a man guilty. In an ethical sense, there is more to guilt than just committing the crime. In Charles Brockden Browns’ Wieland, the reader is presented with a moral dilemma: is Theodore Wieland guilty of murdering his wife and children, even though he claims that the command came from God, or is Carwin guilty because of his history of using persuasive voices, even though his role in the Wieland family’s murder is questionable? To answer these questions, one must consider what determines guilt, such as responsibility, motives, consequences, and the act itself. No matter which view is taken on what determines a man’s guilt, it can be concluded that Wieland bears the fault in the murder of Catharine Wieland and her children. To any religious person, hearing a command from the voice of their god is reason enough to carry out the proposed action, but in the case of Wieland, a third party must take a deeper look at such a command from a God whose known character does not line up with the order He supposedly gives. This makes Wieland’s motivation questionable, especially to those who believe that a man’s motive determines a man’s guilt. In his testimony to the court, Wieland, a pious man, reveals his motive in the murders as he recounts God as saying, â€Å"‘Thy prayers are heard. In proof of thy faith, render me thy wife. This is the victim I chuse. Call her hither and here let her fall’† (190). Being a devout Christian, it is very likely that Wieland would be familiar with the Ten Commandments listed in Deuteronomy 5, and specifically, verse 17 which states, â€Å"You shall not murder†. Though in Isaiah 55:8 the Lord tells Christians to ... ...God’s voice. As Wieland retells his approaching his sister’s house before he hears the voices, he says, â€Å"‘On my way my mind was full of these ideas which related to my intellectual condition. In the torrent of fervid conceptions, I lost sight of my purpose. Some times I stood still; some times I wandered from my path, and experienced some difficulty, on recovering from my fit of musing, to regain it’† (188). Despite all of the other reasons behind Wieland’s guilt, this quote shows that he was not in his right mind on the night he murdered his wife and children. Many different views can be taken on determining guilt, but Wieland’s illogical motive behind killing his family, the disturbing consequences of his actions, his responsibility of his own deeds, and his questionable mental health all point to his guilt in the murder of Catharine Wieland and her children.