I wanted to respond to someone who continues to defy my wishes by commenting anonymously as Blogius Anonymous Maximus. This blogger has a penchant for editing, particularly me, as you will see in his/her comment to me (I doubt it is a her). But there editing skill isn’t what I want to draw attention to; instead I want to address Blogius’ point about me using the category of “sin” in a reductionistic way when I was reflecting, a bit, on the Colorado movie shooting in this post. Here is what Anonymous Maximus wrote in response to that post:
It’s ‘humanity’s’ not ‘humanities’. Nothing like spiritualising a tragedy, and reducing the complex set of psychological and social circumstances which breed such action.
So I misspelled humanity’s — for perspective’s sake, let’s remember that this is a blog dear Blogius (again, thank you, though for exemplifying your editing skills, they must come in quite handy for you) — but I am not really all that concerned with my spelling in my response to dear Anonymous Maximus. What does concern me is his/her concern that my usage of “sin” exemplifies an issue of “spiritualizing” a complex set of pyscho-sociological circumstances. The way that I understand sin, at its core, is as a privation of relationship with God; and it is in this vacuum (or privation) that self love concupiscence or an homo in se incurvatus takes over through which the dynamics on display in Colorado at the movie theater inhered. In other words, Blogius fails to appreciate, it seems, that “sin” is the very occasion that sets the atmosphere in which a systemic evil through nature and nuture has the capacity to be actualised in the most heinous of ways (like the holocaust, or in Colorado at the movie theater).
It seems to me that Blogius is not thinking that Christianly about “sin” in this instance; since he seems to be thinking in rather dualistic ways, abstracting (presumptuously) the language of sin into some ethereal “spiritual” realm, when as Christians we think in integrative ways; such that when we use the category of sin, we understand that to be a term that identifies that there is no such thing as a disembodied (“spiritual”) notion of sin (at least not the kind that Jesus put to death in his body Romans 8.3).
PS. I intentionally inserted some spelling and grammatical errors into this post to make sure that Blogius could keep his editing skills sharp.