Actually, I didn't intend to say that Jill should be cut slack because she was infantilized. If it came off that way, I was being unclear.
What I meant to say was that Jill didn't need to be cut slack for anything. I think what she said was 100 percent defensible.
Her particular Christian belief --- and what is certainly Mary's as well -- makes what Jill said not just accurate but a perfectly right thing to say under the circumstances. As far as I know, Christians who firmly believe in the resurrection of the body -- and I'm 100 percent sure that not just Jill but Mary believe/d in this -- consider that the most comforting thing you can possibly say about the death of a believing Christian. She is with the Lord in her renewed body and she is happier than she has ever been.
After a couple recent deaths in my family, I was assured of this by several people. They intended to be comforting because for them this is the most comforting thought in the world. I don't believe a word of it, but I understood the spirit in which it was intended and I didn't feel critical of them a bit for saying it. And one of the deaths in question was every bit as horrific as Mary's, if not more so.
I was in a devastated state from the horrors the deceased person had gone through, but it never occurred to me for one second to be annoyed at somebody for expressing a belief that they consider a great comfort. I understood that they meant well, so I think it's simply wrong to criticize someone for "bad taste" when their intentions are good.
And as for the way Jill articulated what Mary may have been thinking, I find that completely understandable as well.
I would bet big money that Mary had conversations very similar to the ones Jill invented in her post. After her recent illnesses that left her much more frail than she'd ever imagined, someone who they all describe as an ardent, constant, "soul-winner" almost certainly would have talked longingly and casually about her hopes for the hereafter, I expect. Because I'm sure she felt she had a very personal relationship with Jesus and talked about God and heaven in a personal and casual way.
And the fact that Jill put it in slangy, down-home language, to me simply reflects the fact that both Jill and Mary are and always have been what Michelle describes as "barefoot and backyard people." That's the way Jill talks and it's almost certainly the way Mary talked, too, I imagine.
So, again, the language isn't the way some would talk. But I don't consider that "'bad taste." It's personal and slangy because these were people who believe they have a personal and slangy relationship with Jesus. And my bet is that Mary had that, just as Jill does.
I wouldn't put a bunch of emojis in a social-media post about death. But I can't criticize it as anything more than something done by somebody who's clueless about nuances of expression.
For me, "tacky" and "clueless" are seldom very valid or meaningful criticisms or insults, when you come down to it.
In my opinion, "tacky" and "in bad taste" almost never relate to ethics or morality or ill intentions. They're virtually always just a sign of hamhandedness or ignorance. And they often go along with perfectly good intentions, in my experience, and, to me, that's really the only thing that matters when it comes to how you behave toward others.