Sin and Wrong-Doing in Pagan Culture

No, this is not a censure of our favorite Pagan author's blog, Pagan Culture, which is consistently awesome!

I know many Pagans, myself included, find the word 'sin' to be extremely loaded. For me, it carries heavy Abrahamic notions of morality that are often at odds with my beliefs and values. However, as a word that encapsulates the concept of a 'wrong-doing' that has both physical and spiritual implications, I often have trouble finding a comparative word or phrase that doesn't require exposition. That being said, we move forward.

For the last ten years, I have been following a path that believes morality is a function of being in synchronization with the 'Divine cosmic order'. And within this paradigm, humans--as creations both intrinsically of and intricately within this Divine cosmic order--are naturally predisposed to this moral state, which is a great thing, as it turns out, because our physical, emotional, and spiritual well-being is dependent upon our ability to remain in synchronization with this Divine cosmic order. We are aided in this charge by a reflection of our natural inclination towards equilibrium: our conscience, the little voice in the back of our minds that pushes and pulls our choices to the moral one. And our actions (and sometimes thoughts but to a lesser degree than deliberate acts) should be judged as either synching with this order or out of synch with it.

If we are out of synch with the Divine cosmic order, we should strive to bring ourselves back into synch with the equilibrium of the order. To accomplish this end, we must be repentant--that is, we must be regretful of and remorseful for our wrong-doing--and work to correct the resultant effects of our transgression. For example, if you steal, it is not simply enough to be sorry and promise to never do it again; you must also make reparations by returning the item or otherwise compensating the rightful owner. Therefore, no god can absolve you of the sin and bring you back into equilibrium because reconciliation is something only one can do for oneself.

This morality paradigm has worked well for me over the last ten years, however, nothing is static, people least of all; we are dynamic, perhaps arguably the most of all of the Created Universe. I previously thought my belief well-founded and firm but I have begun to wonder and re-evaluate my understanding of and belief in my moral paradigm.

While I cannot deny that repentance is absolutely necessary to return to a moral state, I am no longer sure about reparations. Surely, one must be repentant to return to a moral state or otherwise one revels in their immorality and is likely to repeat the offense. But if one is repentant, are reparations necessary to be able to return to a moral state? Or, is it just good to make reparations as a reinforcement of repentance and a wholesome practice of which to make a habit? If one is truly repentant but does not make reparations or confession, does one remain in an immoral state?

I know in some Pagan circles people are not considered to be moral or immoral; these are qualities of choices which may indelibly affect the person but never become a character of an individual. The introspective part of the morality process is the only part of importance because no action or reparation can un-do what has been done. An individual who has sinned must just accept the stain of the sin and move forward with life. So, is confession--meaning, identifying both your sin and your responsibility thereof to a third party, especially an offended party--an important part of returning to a moral state? Can you be a moral person if no one knows that you have sinned? If you have sinned against someone, can you return to a moral state without the offended party ever knowing of the transgression? In other words, if you sin and are not caught but are truly repentant and determine to never transgress in that manner again but do nothing else, are you still immoral? Or, are you moral once you introspectively repent and determine to never do it again? For example, if you speak a lie about a friend to a mutual friend, feel honest repentance, and correct your lie to the mutual friend, do you remain sinful if you do not tell your friend that you spoke a lie?

Furthemore, how can we possibly judge our own actions against a measure that is so incomprehensibly larger than ourselves, i.e., the Divine cosmic order of the Created. Can we really apply the rules that are in effect on a macrocosmic scale to the petty microcosmic quandary of whether I use time at work to blog?

The Divine cosmic order also implies a consistent measure for the entire Universe! What about situational circumstances? What about the muck and grime of human culture? That is to say, how are the mores and actions relative to culture judged? My conscience, that aforementioned reflection of my natural inclination towards equilibrium with the cosmic order, informs me that taking a life outside of self-defense is one of the gravest and out-of-synch actions one could possibly do. But, there have been entire cultures that practiced human sacrifice! This presents me with something of a predicament: either these cultures were completely out of synch with the cosmic order for their duration or my paradigm which posits a cosmic order by which human action and thought should be judged as either moral or immoral is flawed. Either 'they' are wrong or I am!

The obvious leap then is an understanding of morality as relative. This would mean that morality is completely a social construction and dependent upon the human experience. This, in turn, must mean that morality cannot be divinely inspired or directed because the gods are independent of human experience and society. Of all three paradigms, I find this the hardest to accept. If morality is relative, then what meaning does any of it have? If it is relative and each action is not instrinsically moral or immoral, what is the point in having a moral code or ethos? If morality is relative, then there is no reason to live a moral life beyond the vain satisfaction and pleasure of thinking that you lived within the proscribed limits of your paradigm. If morality is relative than we should never judge ourselves or others for our actions any more harshly than we would a tornado that levels a town.

So that is where I am now. Sin is a transgression of an absolute, though situationally dependent, moral code that must be repented and redressed or at least repented. Or sin is meaningless because morality is relative and also essentially meaningless.

But what about you? Where do you stand? Where do you draw your morality from? What serves as your guide? What is the nature of morality and sin? Do you ever find your own morality at conflict with your culture? Presuming you weren't raised a Pagan, how has your morality changed since becoming a Pagan?