Second Sunday of Advent

Lectionary: 5

People of the whole Judean countryside 
and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem were going out to him and were being baptized by him in the Jordan River as they acknowledged their sins.




Much has been said lately in the national discussion about sin. I refer to the revelations of sexual improprieties by powerful men in church, government and the entertainment industry. 
The Christian surely notices how reluctant the media are to use the word. There is much said about power, harassment and exploitation; little mention of sin: venial, mortal or original. And yet the concept has so much to contribute to the conversation. 
During the Second World War, Reinhold Niebuhr, American Protestant theologian of the mid-20th century, in his Gifford Lecture, describes our human condition:

The high estimate of the human stature implied in the concept of "image of God" stands in paradoxical juxtaposition to the low estimate of human virtue in Christian thought. Man is a sinner. His sin is defined as rebellion against God. The Christian estimate of human evil is so serious precisely because it places evil at the very center of human personality: in the will. This evil cannot be regarded complacently as the inevitable consequence of his finiteness or the fruit of his involvement in the contingencies and necessities of nature. Sin is occasioned precisely by the fact that man refuses to admit his "creatureliness" and to acknowledge himself as merely a member of a total unity of life. He pretends to be more than he is. Nor can he, as in both rationalistic and mystic dualism, dismiss his sins as residing in that part of himself which is not his true self; that is, that part of himself which is involved in physical necessity. In Christianity it is not the eternal man who judges the finite man; but the Eternal and Holy God who judges sinful man. Nor is redemption in the power of the eternal man who gradually sloughs off finite man. Man is not divided against himself so that the essential man can be extricated from the non-essential. Man contradicts himself within the terms of his true essence. His essence is free self-determination. His sin is the wrong use of his freedom and his consequent destruction. The Nature and Destiny of Man. Reinhold Niebuhr (1941) ISBN 0-02-387510-0

This is a dense paragraph in a very dense book, but we should realize how this theologian understands sin. Because it comes from the deepest part of our nature, our will, we are responsible for our sin.
For that very reason, there is no technique (spiritual practice, philosophical adjustment or technology, mechanical or chemical) that can deliver us from sin. We cannot suppose that, "My better self will save me from my worst self," if I just try harder, think the right thoughts, or use a certain discipline (yoga, mindfulness, sensitivity training, wellness, etc.)
Of course, secularity rejects the Christian understanding of sin. Along with the recent uproar about sexual harassment some people believe this moment is the long-awaited tipping point when Good Men finally will hear women's complaints, join the movement and effectively uproot the culture of sexual harassment. They insist harassment is not about sex, it's about power; and suppose when men understand that, they'll Get It.
Awareness can help. Hearing the anger of our mothers, sisters, wives, daughters, nieces, and friends can certainly help. But most of the response will be simple denial: "I didn't mean it that way." "I thought you were okay with this behavior." "I'll never do it again." "Now I understand." etc.
The only helpful response must be, "I have sinned. I can neither change nor save myself. I am willing to obey God with my every thought, word and deed."
The will, which is the origin of sin, must become obedient to God, even as Jesus was obedient to his Father.  Under an obedience which is serious and eager, it's not that difficult to change one's desires. If, at one time, I wanted the pleasure of sex or the comfort of alcohol, I can now say "I do not want that!" without hesitation. Like every other decision, it becomes habitual with repetition. 
As we approach Christmas we are assaulted again with the question, "What do you want for Christmas?" as if placating my will, need, preference or desire can make a difference. The question is guaranteed to maintain the status quo.
The infant, obedient to Joseph and Mary, will show us the way.