Return to Sinner

[vovat]

Remember when I said I'd look up the origin of the Seven Deadly Sins? Well, here's the Wikipedia article on them, and it sounds like the idea was really codified by Pope Gregory I in the late sixth century, but it can be traced back to Evagrius Ponticus' eight evil thoughts. I assume the number seven was chosen because of its importance in the Bible. I also found it interesting that "sloth" was originally used to refer to depression, rather than laziness. I'm not sure the concept of depression as a sin would fly nowadays, except possibly among the most conservative Catholics. But really, the idea of these sins in general gets too far into thought-crime territory even nowadays. Lust is especially bad in that respect, because it isn't really hurting anybody unless you, like, actually try to have sex with everyone you find attractive. And current opinion seems to be that rape is usually motivated by desire for power more than lust. But even with the others, isn't anger necessary sometimes? And is laziness really bad in and of itself, or is it only a problem when it's accompanied by a lack of responsibility? Also, you'll get people insisting that the reason people don't believe in God is because they love sin. I can see that with gluttony or lust, and even anger in some cases, but does anyone actually enjoy being envious? Do you think you can help me out with these questions, Gregory?

Comments

[rockinlibrarian.livejournal.com]

My impression of the Seven Deadlies is that they're "sins" in a different sense of the word than people normally use. You don't COMMIT anger, but anger is instead a Sinful Attitude that can LEAD to the committal of "sins." Clinging to these attitudes is Living in a State of Sin, in other words. In practical terms, it's kind of like cognitive behavioral therapy, where you work on changing the thoughts BEHIND your emotions in order to change your emotions; working on the Seven Deadlies is working on changing the attitudes behind your actions so as to change your actions.

Actually I think the early definition of sloth may fit me better than the current one does, and the current one's the one I seem most susceptible to in the first place.