As an Anglican I accept what Article IX says concerning Original Sin. However the two Genesis accounts of creation are Middle Eastern and Semitic approaches to understanding the world. Adam and Eve are representative of humankind as we find ourselves in God’s creation. In a sense we are all Adam and Eve and in need of redemption by Christ. In the words of St Paul – “ for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23.)
“Original sin standeth not in the following of Adam, (as the Pelagians do vainly talk;) but it is the fault and corruption of the Nature of every man, that naturally is engendered of the offspring of Adam; whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and is of his own nature inclined to evil, so that the flesh lusteth always contrary to the Spirit; and therefore in every person born into this world, it deserveth God’s wrath and damnation. And this infection of nature doth remain, yea in them that are regenerated; whereby the lust of the flesh, called in Greek phronema sarkos (which some do expound the wisdom, some sensuality, some the affection, some the desire, of the flesh), is not subject to the Law of God. And although there is no condemnation for them that believe and are baptized; yet the Apostle doth confess, that concupiscence and lust hath of itself the nature of sin.”
The language is somewhat quaint, but the thrust of it is clear. I’ve always assumed that the Roman Catholic Church more or less believes the same.
The word “infection” is especially relevant – “And this infection of nature doth remain.”
We are fallen creatures. Nature is red hot in tooth and claw and that includes us.” Paul’s Epistle to the Romans is as relevant for to-day as when it was written by him. Paul begins with Christ and what God has done for us in Christ.
In the Greek Orthodox Church’s Faith, the term “original sin” refers to the “first” sin of Adam and Eve. As a result of this sin, humanity bears the “consequences” of sin, the chief of which is death. Here the word “original” may be seen as synonymous with “first.” Hence, the “original sin” refers to the “first sin” in much the same way as “original chair” refers to the “first chair.”
In the West, humanity likewise bears the “consequences” of the “original sin” of Adam and Eve. However, the West also understands that humanity is likewise “guilty” of the sin of Adam and Eve. The term “Original Sin” here refers to the condition into which humanity is born, a condition in which guilt as well as consequence is involved.
In the Orthodox Christian understanding, while humanity does bear the consequences of the original, or first, sin, humanity does not bear the personal guilt associated with this sin. Adam and Eve are guilty of their willful action; we bear the consequences, chief of which is death.
While the Orthodox Church does accord Augustine of Hippo the title “saint” and recognizes the vast number of theological works he produced, Augustine was not as well known in the Christian East. His works were not translated into Greek until the 14th century; as such, he had little or no influence on mainstream Orthodox thought until 17th century.
It would be interesting to know the views of Lutherans and Calvinists believe.
Baptists and many other Evangelical Churches do not believe in infant baptism.
OK, I’ll bite. From The Augsburg Confession
“Also they teach that since the fall of Adam all men begotten in the natural way are born with sin, that is, without the fear of God, without trust in God, and with concupiscence; and that this disease, or vice of origin, is truly sin, even now condemning and bringing eternal death upon those not born again through Baptism and the Holy Ghost.
They Condemn the Pelagians and others who deny that original depravity is sin, and who, to obscure the glory of Christ’s merit and benefits, argue that man can be justified before God by his own strength and reason.”
Unusually succinct for our documents.
The Calvinist can speak for themselves, I think I know, sort of, but speaking for others doctrine, well I always get it at least partly wrong.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Its almost identical with the C of E, but in much more contemporary language.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Probably a newer translation, the original is, of course, in German.
Shouldn’t be a lot of variation, except by those with different goals, they were all working from the same source documents, after all.
LikeLiked by 1 person
St Paul begins with Christ – “Paul a bond servant of Christ Jesus, called as an Apostle set apart for the Gospel of God. which he promised before hand through his prophets in the holy scriptures, concerning his Son, who was born of the seed of David according to the flesh.” (Romans 1:1)
He goes on -“who was declared with power to be the Son of God by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord.”
LikeLiked by 2 people
On a sidebar note, My LCMSPastor friend gave a great talk, well at least the notes he let me take a look at were great. The talk was about St. Athanasius’ On the Incarnation’ where the pastor asserted that God must die in order to put right the original sin of man. Of course, St. Thomas argued in the Summa Theologica that God did not have to safe the world in such a manner, but it was fitting. Nonetheless, The Pastor’s presentation was convincing, and furthermore, as I have examined Athanasius’ work, it appears that the Church Father and St. Thomas Aquinas may be in conflict here.
LikeLiked by 2 people
That is interesting.
LikeLike
He had to die, how else could he identify with us who have to die and raise us to new Life in the New Creation? The death of our Lord on the Cross is the total giving of himself for the Life of the World.
Philippians 2:5-11King James Version (KJV)
5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:
6 Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God:
7 But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men:
8 And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross.
9 Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:
10 That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth;
11 And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
LikeLike
it appears that the Church Father and St. Thomas Aquinas may be in conflict here.
No…that cant be. We love everything men say.
LikeLike
In fact, Lutheran theology is fairly on par in my view. Of course, we disagree on Justification although I really believe it to be an argument of semantics. I often hear Catholics describe Prima Gratia and Lutherans describe Faith Alone as the same thing. Only to declare it not when I say, “Ah, you just described the same thing.” Also, I disagree on the Eucharist, Apostolic succession , and LCMS (I know other Lutherans are different) fundamental approach to interpreting scripture.
However, what these Lutherans get absolutely right is it’s connection to the Fall, The Incarnation, and the Cross. What a beautiful testament to the Christian faith.
LikeLiked by 2 people
In the Eucharist, I see little difference really, except the terminology (trans- vs. sub-), both are the Real Presence, either changed into or ‘in under and around’ but maybe I’m missing something. On the Incarnation, yes, we differ, how the approaches differ, well doesn’t surprise me, but I know little about it. Very much so for me,on the fall.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The Catechism (of 1994) has this on the subject, using rather less quaint language: No. 390: “The account of the fall in Genesis 3 uses figurative language, but affirms a primeval event, a deed that took place at the beginning of the history of man. Revelation gives us the certainty of faith that the whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents.” There is a lot more in Nos 396 onwards, under the headings “Man’s first sin” and “The consequences of Adam’s sin for humanity” and the In Brief section at the end of this chapter, No.418, we learn that “As a result of original sin, human nature is weakened in its powers, subject to ignorance, suffering and the domination of death, and inclined to sin (this inclination is called “concupiscence”). I haven’t time to write it all out (but it makes a lot of sense psychologically – and has nothing to do with my own “personal views” obviously).
LikeLiked by 2 people
Absolutely I agree with you Francis.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I see good brother Chalcedon has caved into good brother Gareths demands and has removed his picture. There is a bigger picture, im sure you are all aware, but don’t want to know.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Im not following you good brother. When I say the bigger picture, I mean the battle in the spirit world. People don’t like to deal with that. People like their velveeta processed cheese food spread and their easychair in front of the TV and their can of air freshener. They don’t want to know about the spirit world. They don’t want to know that they will spend eternity in it. They don’t want to know Satan is going to become flesh and rule the earth for 7 long yrs. But they are ready for their master. they already love the things of men. Their god is a rotting cracker in a golden sun god symbol called a monsterance. They will have no problem switching to the Beast and his Image.
LikeLike
I like the new picture, dear brother.
LikeLike
Carry on bowing to the computer images, bozo …
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am in agreement with the Orthodox view of original sin rather than the catholic.
I have some big issues with Augustine’s theology in a number of areas. I have read all Pelagius extant works and am not so sure he taught all the things attributed to him by his opponents. I do not think that’s just Celtic bias.
As you indicate this has a relationship to baptism and our practice is adult baptism of those who profess and indicate personal commitment to Christ as saviour and Lord.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rob,
I have done a number of Adult Baptisms in the sea.
I am very impressed by the tremendous change that occurs in the candidate as he or she emerges from the water. The tremendous significance of Adult Baptism is that the step is taken by a believer who has repented of his sins and wants to have the new life offered by Christ.
Infant Baptism doesn’t have the same significance. No matter how much one explains the Faith to the parents there is something missing – The holy desire of the person who wants to follow Jesus Christ. We can only do that as a mature adult.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I read a comment from Michael Green (Can’t remember the book) suggesting that the Church of England abandon infant baptism for a generation until it became meaningful to parents with faith. Irrespective of theological considerations I wondered why not suggest to abandon it all together as it was proving so ineffective.
The previous Anglican priest at St Mary’s in Abergavenny (I think it was St Mary’s as there are 2 Anglican churches there) is friend of ours, (In fact he did the marriage of our son). He was baptising a number of adult converts. He seems to have been somewhat like yourself high church in relation to sacraments and liturgy and evangelical on the gospel. His bishop challenged him about re-baptism as he was baptising those who may have been baptised as babies, he told the bishop none of them could remember if they had been baptised.
One time he handed in his undated resignation to the bishop (That may have been at a previous diocese) and said you can date it any time you want to get rid of me. The bishop never did. He thought that the fact that his congregation gave more money to the church than any other in the diocese was relevant. Was he being cynical???
LikeLiked by 1 person
The question has been under discussion for a long time in the Church of England. Michael Green puts up a very good argument. The real problem with the C of E is that it is the state church and everyone feels that they ought to be catered for in the way that they want.Believe me it leads to tensions especially regarding Marriage and Baptisms.
LikeLike
I appreciate that. The situation is not the same for your Welsh and Scots cousins, though many do not realise it. We sympathise.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Just popping back in here VERY briefly to confirm something.
As Gareth has quoted, following some private comments I made to him — I wish to formally state that the following is indeed my opinion :
I left the blog very long ago, after reading and thinking about both Mortalium Animos and Unitatis Redintegratio. The latter document authorises Bishops, and the Holy See, to allow Catholics to participate in particular Ecumenical groups or gatherings on a case-by-case basis — however, without such authorisation, the general prohibition in Mortalium Animos against such participation remains fully in force, for the reason that Catholics cannot collaborate with the propagation of such false doctrines, or blasphemies, or heresies contrary to the Faith that are all too common in the false Ecumenism that is BTW overtly condemned by both Mortalium Animos and Unitatis Redintegratio. The Watchtower blog is exactly just such a group, but contrary for example to the group at Taizé, it lacks all recognition and the necessary permissions from the competent Bishop.
—
That is also the gist of the explanation (and apology) that I made to dear Jessica when I ceased contributing in here, some years ago.
——-
As for the doctrine of Original Sin presented in this post, I’m sorry but it’s deficient — the Original Sin is indeed a personal sin, that we all are guilty of, albeit that we are forgiven for this Sin in Baptism. Even the unborn are a locus of Sin, in the suffering to start with of pregnancies that the Story of Eden illustrates us of being subjected to, as well as in the intrinsic evils of the temptations towards abortion, and contraception, rape for procreation, death of mothers for their pregnancies, and all other manner of such evils that the unborn wishes not, and yet is in essence and nature co-involved with.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks to you and to Gareth for bringing it up, I have read both again after some 20 years or more since doing so. I concur that this type of ecumenism besides being unauthorized is probably more hurtful than helpful and does indeed often spread the evil of a false irenicism and lack of adequate correction and defense of the Catholic position.
Good to see you again. I missed your leaving this place Jaba and I guess I missed where you explained your reasons for departing. Hope all is well with you.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Can I remind all of you that this blog was started by an Anglican, and that none of you commenting or posting here was forced to do so?
LikeLiked by 1 person
It seems that you’re implicitly admitting that as an ecumenical experiment, AATW has failed …
LikeLike
Since it says that this is an Anglican blog and attracts commentators from all churches, I’m unsure quite how you manage to jump to that conclusion.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have no desire to get directly involved in the extremely destructive and hurtful climate that Malcolm’s actions have created. I will not be tempted towards any personal hostility towards yourself, and most certainly never against dear Jessica, nor indeed against Gareth, no matter how hard Malcolm tries to foster hatred instead of love.
—
Nevertheless, whilst I understand well that Jessica has now mostly moved away from the blog, she certainly did not originally create it as “an Anglican” one, notwithstanding her own Anglicanism, but she tried to create a more generally Christian one.
To say now that it is Anglican in principle, today in 2017, simply confirms my assessment — and fair enough, it’s your blog not “ours”, but then why should you seek to apparently criticise the pointing out by Catholics that contributions to non-Catholic Christian forums or groups such as this one must remain limited as is described in the Discipline of the Church ? There is no contradiction at all between this point and “that none of us commenting or posting here was forced to do so“.
—
I still think that the best among you would be more spiritually satisfied in the Ordinariate.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dear Jabba Papa, I am glad to see your name here and thus to be given the opportunity to thank you for all the help you gave me in the Comment Box of the Catholic Herald some years ago. You were always a beacon of Faith and knowledge of that Faith. I can understand your reasons for leaving this site.
LikeLiked by 1 person