Sin and the Law

It is a confusing time to be an American Christian. Or at least it should be, especially when it comes to views about sin. It's fascinating how biblical teachings have evolved into a theology which takes the emphasis off how harshly we judge ourselves and places the focus on making sure others are not "living in sin."

Perhaps (and this is a big perhaps) if our thoughts are strictly to help others by revealing to them the error of their ways, so they can enter into a life of blessing, it would be more understandable. But we witness daily a huge segment of Christian society which seems to have as its goal eradication of sin in others simply because the sin is seen to be offensive. I am unconvinced this is what Jesus had in mind.

Jesus taught the concept of unconditional love, a phrase which is heard in many Christian circles, most often as it applies to God's mercy in dealing with us. Is that message lost in translation when we look at others? Do we ask for unconditional love but refuse to give it?

We see some trying mightily to address certain "sin" issues through the law. How did particular sins get chosen to be targeted? 

Without exploring the history of the "seven deadly sins" in Christian tradition, they are usually recognized as: lying, wrath, greed, sloth, pride, lust, envy and gluttony. Those concepts are supported by scripture and join other Old and New Testament lists of sins which include things such as adultery, divorce, fornication, idolatry, sorcery, hatred and revelings.

Certainly there are sins which are currently against the law which should be outlawed in civilized society -- murder and perjury come to mind in that category. But should greed, for example, be against the law? If not, why not, when stealing is a crime? Jesus made it clear he intended for his followers to give of their resources to help others. It is difficult to deny that helping those in poverty is one of the major commands of scripture. This is one reason why it’s a confusing time for Christianity in America because we are a country which, by law and governmental practice, embraces greed in the name of capitalism, while at the same time is becoming less tolerant of helping those in need.

Back to what sins should be against the law. The solution does not seem to be the need for more laws against a few subjectively defined sins. (An example: Why are divorce and adultery legal -- with no campaigns by Christians to ban them -- while gay marriage is such a heated target? Another example: Some very limited efforts have been made to address the sin of gluttony through legislation. But limiting the size of sugary sodas and other food which helps make us fat is seen as a "liberal effort" to take away our personal rights. Am I the only who finds this confusing?) The standards of Jesus transcend what can be legislated. Additionally, if a “Christian nation” can’t abide by the teachings of Jesus out of simple devotion to him, there isn’t any reason to believe everyone will do what’s right out of fear of a fine or imprisonment. 

A little more focus on our own sins and a little less glaring spotlight on the shortcomings of others is also a good place to start.

A Significant Life

I recently read a quote attributed to Mahatma Gandhi which has continued to be on my mind for several days, "Whatever you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that you do it." It is a simple statement which seems to me to capture pessimism, optimism and realism all at once.

Calling attention to the insignificance of our actions might make one wonder if there is any point in trying to make a difference or change the world around us. The overwhelming nature of so many problems, in society, in government, in religion, can often be discouraging, can make it seem as though individuals are powerless when it comes to having a positive impact. This way of thinking leads many to conclude there isn't much point in trying to do the right thing.

But then is the notion that we have to try anyway, that optimistic spark that makes us believe good can overcome evil, that the actions of one person, no matter how small, do matter. Jesus expressed this message in his teachings. For example, he said in Matthew 10:42 whoever "gives to one of these little ones even a cup of cold water to drink, truly I say to you, he shall not lose his reward." A cup of water doesn't seem like much, but that should not stop us from offering it. 

Optimism and pessimism aside, the reality of the statement, for me, is that our actions, large and small, have consequences, produce results. Our lack of action also has consequences. 

Ghandi was one of the most influential leaders of the 20th century. The methods he used to bring about change in his native India were unconventional, borne not out of power associated with great wealth or a mighty military, but of acts of non-violent protest, of fasting, of seeking to bring together different religions. His struggle was against the mighty British Empire and against a pervasive caste system which singled out certain members of society as "untouchables." Many of his methods would be viewed, particularly today, as insignificant against seemingly insurmountable odds and yet, he did not let that stop him from trying. And by trying, he changed India.

A lesson for the rest of us in this is that his life was not lived according to theories, empty doctrine or grand theology. He practiced simple principles, realizing the importance of even seemingly insignificant acts.

My Own Red Shoe Issues

My Aunt Berta passed away this week. Had she lived until July 2, she would have been 97 years old. She was one of the most religious people I have ever known, and frankly, I struggle with how I feel about the kind of religion she practiced. She told me one time, "I remember back when there were only black shoes and brown shoes. When they started making red shoes, I thought wearing red shoes was a sin." She laughed, and said, "Isn't that funny?"

Yes, I did think it was funny, but I also had to muse at all the other things she continued to think were sinful which really don't have any basis for being labeled as such according to New Testament teachings. For example, not only did she believe women are supposed to only wear long dresses, but   her modesty standards demanded arms were not to be seen, either...only long sleeves were acceptable. Most jewelry as adornment was not permissible, but wearing broaches and pins on sweaters and coats was okay. Long hair and beards on men are a no-no, even though her apartment was adorned with lovely "portraits" of Jesus with flowing locks and well-trimmed facial hair. Tattoos? Forbidden!

I hesitate to write these things about my aunt because it might sound as though I'm judging her. However, I try not to judge because she was sincere in her beliefs, and it is a dilemma for all believers, I think, to find a way to live in the world according to our own earnest perception of God and his requirements of us. I know many think the Bible is all "black and white" with no grey areas, but that just isn't true. Those areas in the Bible which are not clearly defined are how we tend to get caught up in distracting details, the kind of details Jesus doesn't appear to have been all that concerned with.

The larger issues of love, understanding and compassion must be what unite us. Unity is what Jesus prayed would be the trademark of his followers. We have allowed the details to fragment us to such an extent that unity is definitely not what the Christian world is known for. What a shame, and beyond that, I believe our lack of unity is perhaps the biggest sin of all. When we can't work together because our specific opinions don't line up, we are not serving Jesus effectively. Our bickering amongst ourselves is not, to say the least, appealing to those outside our faith.

I do not follow the same path my aunt followed and many Christians don't agree with the path I've chosen, but that's okay, and that's my point. It seems many of us have certain needs in what we believe will allow us to remain close to God, but those needs don't necessarily apply to others. The fact is just like a red herring in literature, we all have "red shoe" issues in our beliefs, those things which distract us from the actual teachings of Jesus and can lead the church in the way of strife and discord. My aunt and I (sometimes, sharply) disagreed on certain things, but she taught me many lessons over the years. For me to continually seek to understand what kind of red shoe issues I'm hanging onto is my Aunt Berta's greatest legacy to me.