Jackie Bailey, an award-winning author and pastoral care practitioner, challenges the traditional Christian doctrine of sin, suggesting that viewing sin as 'missing the mark' rather than inherent unworthiness can transform shame into a catalyst for ethical action. In her column for Making sense of it, Bailey explores how this reinterpretation offers a more constructive framework for navigating moral failures and societal issues.
From Childhood Shame to a New Understanding
Bailey recalls her childhood indoctrination with the concept of original sin, which instilled a deep sense of unworthiness. She describes praying 'Forgive us our trespasses' at Sunday mass, not just for minor misdeeds like stealing a cookie, but for a fundamental brokenness she felt burdened by. This teaching conflicted with the church's message that God is love, leading her to question how a loving deity could condemn the imperfect.
Although Bailey eventually left the church, these formative ideas lingered. Seeking an ethical life outside religion, she asks whether the doctrine of sin holds any practical value. She distinguishes between actual sins—specific transgressions like those in the Ten Commandments—and original sin, which she describes as a foundational state of human brokenness requiring divine salvation.
Alternative Views on Human Nature
Bailey notes that many religions do not share the doctrine of original sin. For instance, Islam teaches that humans are born in a state of fitrah, or purity, with the potential to move toward goodness. Similarly, Jewish tradition and some Christian sects hold that people enter the world innocent. However, even in these traditions, the concept of sin can become problematic when it condemns aspects of identity such as gender or sexual orientation, leading to personal shame, trauma, and even community exile.
She highlights that the Hebrew word chet and the Greek hamartia, both translated as 'sin,' literally mean 'to miss the mark.' This interpretation, she argues, is more useful than viewing sin as inherent wrongness. It parallels the Buddhist concept of dukkha, often translated as suffering but better understood as being off-kilter, like a wheel off its axis. Sin, then, might be a sense that the world is slightly out of alignment with a benevolent universe.
Sin as Disharmony and a Call to Action
Bailey proposes that sin, understood as disharmony, operates on personal, communal, and cosmic levels. Personally, it might signal a need for balance between work and play or generosity and self-interest. Relationally, it could indicate a disconnect with others, nature, or a higher purpose. Societally, it encompasses systemic issues like racial injustice or economic inequality that communities must address. Universally, it invites individuals to co-create goodness and positively influence humanity's impact on the cosmos.
The utility of sin, Bailey suggests, lies in its ability to encourage 'right action,' a term borrowed from Buddhism. Instead of interpreting a sense of not-quite-rightness as a sign of personal defect, it can be seen as a cue to act. Shame, she observes, often leads to paralysis—'the fetal position'—whereas recognizing that things are out of whack can be motivating. With the right tools, one can fix a wobbly wheel and set it true.
Bailey's reflection offers a pragmatic approach to ethics, moving beyond guilt to embrace responsibility. She concludes that by redefining sin as a call to action, individuals can transform their failures into opportunities for growth and societal improvement.
