Jesus Saves
Photo by Jack B on Unsplash
I want to look at the expression, “Hate the sin and love the sinner.” Perhaps because it was repeated so often in the disaffiliation debate, I tend to shut down when I hear someone use this tired, old cliché. I have never liked axioms designed to shut down or limit the free exchange of ideas. After the past year, this piece of pithy religious wisdom, as my grandma would say, “annoys the fire out of me.” Why?
The phrase "hate the sin and love the sinner" has been used as a moral rubric and justification for religious discrimination for centuries. It suggests that it is possible to separate a person from their actions, condemning the behavior while showing compassion to the individual. While this sentiment may seem well-intentioned, it is a concept fraught with danger. It is inherently problematic and can lead to harmful consequences. Let’s think about it.
One of the fundamental problems with the phrase is its oversimplification of complex moral and ethical issues. It reduces multifaceted situations to a binary perspective, implying that behaviors can be neatly categorized as sins while individuals are seen as separate entities. Numerous factors influence human behavior, including upbringing, environment, and personal experiences. Reducing it to mere "sin" disregards the complexity of human nature.
The phrase often serves as a cover for judgment and stigmatization. Labeling certain behaviors as sins inherently casts judgment on those who engage in them. This judgment can lead to stigmatization, discrimination, and the marginalization of individuals based on their actions. Instead of fostering understanding and empathy, it perpetuates a continual cycle of condemnation.
"Hate the sin and love the sinner" perpetuates an unhealthy duality that separates individuals from their actions. It implies that people can be easily categorized into "sinners" and "non-sinners," failing to acknowledge the inherent complexity of human nature. This binary perspective ignores the idea that people are capable of virtuous and flawed actions and that growth and change are possible.
What troubles me most is this: the phrase opens the door to hypocrisy. It allows individuals to profess love and compassion while harboring resentment and prejudice towards those whose actions they deem sinful. Again, this hypocrisy can be especially harmful when used to justify the recurring theme of discrimination or exclusion.
Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of "hate the sin and love the sinner" is that it hinders genuine empathy and understanding. Instead of fostering open dialogue and compassion, it encourages a moralistic stance that can lead to intolerance and polarization. It discourages individuals from understanding the underlying reasons for behaviors and promotes a rigid, unforgiving mindset.
The phrase "hate the sin and love the sinner" may have good intentions, but it is fundamentally flawed and theologically dangerous. It oversimplifies complex issues, encourages judgment and stigmatization, promotes an unhealthy duality, opens the door to hypocrisy, and hinders genuine empathy and understanding. Rather than relying on such a simplistic and potentially harmful phrase, it is crucial to approach ethical and moral matters with nuance, compassion, and a genuine commitment to understanding the complexities of human behavior.
Richard Bryant
The Rev. Richard Bryant is an ordained elder in the North Carolina Annual Conference of The United Methodist Church. This post is republished with permission from his Substack blog.