Children & Original Sin

  • Thread starter Thread starter GunslingerSaint
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

GunslingerSaint

Guest
Well, since my Question hasn’t been answered from the “Ask an Apologist” Forums I thought I’d ask here:

Theoretically, if 2 baptized Catholics (which have the stain of Original sin removed, consequently) marry and get a child, wouldn’t that child be sinless?

Some (name removed by moderator)ut would be really appreciated.
  • Pax.
 
Being baptized doesn’t make you immaculate, it makes you redeemed. Being born human is to be born with original sin, unless by a singular grace of God you have been redeemed at the moment of conception.

This is like asking if two people who have had nose jobs get married and have a baby, would their baby look like he or she had had a nose job.
 
GunslingerSaint said:
Well, since my Question hasn’t been answered from the “Ask an Apologist” Forums I thought I’d ask here:

Theoretically, if 2 baptized Catholics (which have the stain of Original sin removed, consequently) marry and get a child, wouldn’t that child be sinless?

Some (name removed by moderator)ut would be really appreciated.
  • Pax.
Click to expand...
So if two people who have had an arm amputated married, wouldn’t their child be born with only one arm?

Don’t mean to be flip, but it’s the best way I can answer.

Peace
James
 
GunslingerSaint said:
Well, since my Question hasn’t been answered from the “Ask an Apologist” Forums I thought I’d ask here:

Theoretically, if 2 baptized Catholics (which have the stain of Original sin removed, consequently) marry and get a child, wouldn’t that child be sinless?

Some (name removed by moderator)ut would be really appreciated.
  • Pax.
Click to expand...
No, All humans are conceived with Original Sin. It is then removed by Baptism.
 
Note that baptism does not remove all the effects of original sin. We still suffer concupicence, the desire for those things which move us away from God, and a weakness in the face of such desires. We also still suffer phyical pain and death.
 
Hello there!

As far as I understand, the stain of original sin gets transmitted through the parents to the children. Is that correct?
 
GunslingerSaint said:
Hello there!

As far as I understand, the stain of original sin gets transmitted through the parents to the children. Is that correct?
Click to expand...
First of all, I like your Ukrainian. I don’t speak it, but I know some Russian, enough to see that you weren’t writing Russian, and enough to understand your prayer: Perhaps I need more mercy than you.

Second, questions like yours are simply excellent. Why? They force folks to think.

Given the common understanding of what Original Sin is, one would think that your implication is correct.

But the common understanding is wrong.

Original Sin is inherited from one’s parents because our humanity is inherited from one’s parents.

Our humanity is not self-caused. Our lives are “contingent.” We depend on things outside of ourselves for our continuing survival. When we apprehend this with our God-given intellect-and-free-will, we are panicky “selfishness machines.”

This apprehending is reinforced by six trillion cells in our bodies, every one of which asks the same question: “When do we eat?”

This is what our parents gave birth to – sin machines, with no reason to do anything but sin.

This status further comprises a state of alienation from God – unworthiness to shake God’s hand, so to speak.

That’s “Original Sin.”

I’ll get in trouble here for saying this, but I will: In my opinion, viewing Original Sin as a “stain” causing us to love sin, imposed on the 100,000,000,000 descendents of two historical people without belly buttons, because God in His sovereignty decreed to extend it to all of their descendents as a way of being just in response to some kind of sin involving the first two historical people, is bad theology.

Once we realize that inherited humanity is the state of alienation we call “Original Sin,” we recognize the need for grace.

Grace copes well with the problem – but it is not compulsive.
 
First of all, thanks for the compliment. It’s a little bit easier for me learning Ukrainian because I can speak some Polish.

But now to the subject: asfar as I see Original sin, you guys are basically telling me that Original sin is being transmitted universally to all humans at birth because of the human nature and race itself, not something inherited from the parents because they are/were in the state of Original sin?
 
GunslingerSaint said:
First of all, thanks for the compliment. It’s a little bit easier for me learning Ukrainian because I can speak some Polish.

But now to the subject: asfar as I see Original sin, you guys are basically telling me that Original sin is being transmitted universally to all humans at birth because of the human nature and race itself, not something inherited from the parents because they are/were in the state of Original sin?
Click to expand...
That sounds about right.

Peace
James
 
GunslingerSaint said:
First of all, thanks for the compliment. It’s a little bit easier for me learning Ukrainian because I can speak some Polish.

But now to the subject: asfar as I see Original sin, you guys are basically telling me that Original sin is being transmitted universally to all humans at birth because of the human nature and race itself, not something inherited from the parents because they are/were in the state of Original sin?
Click to expand...
Not at birth, but at conception. Otherwise, correct. конечно!!!
 
A question though, if Original sin is transmitted through the human race generally and not from the parents, that leaves 2 questions:
  1. Why did Mary need to be Immaculate?
  2. How can the Human nature of Christ be not sinful, then? 🤷
 
GunslingerSaint said:
A question though, if Original sin is transmitted through the human race generally and not from the parents, that leaves 2 questions:
  1. Why did Mary need to be Immaculate?
  2. How can the Human nature of Christ be not sinful, then? 🤷
Click to expand...
I will give this a shot.

Mary was immaculate because she bore God (Jesus Christ). The only way this would be possible would be in a perfect vessel (womb). The only way this would be perfect is with out any sin (either original or otherwise).

Jesus Christ was human in body only. His Soul and Spirit is God and therefore perfect. Sin is not on the human body, but on the soul.
 
GunslingerSaint said:
Well, since my Question hasn’t been answered from the “Ask an Apologist” Forums I thought I’d ask here:

Theoretically, if 2 baptized Catholics (which have the stain of Original sin removed, consequently) marry and get a child, wouldn’t that child be sinless?

Some (name removed by moderator)ut would be really appreciated.
  • Pax.
Click to expand...
How about looking at it like this: Grace, which is imparted at Baptism and eliminates Original Sin, is not natural to humans. By its very definition it is something extra, the Divine Life added on top of our human nature. What is passed on from the parents is human nature, not Divine Nature, and therefore Grace is not imparted (and again, it is Grace that eliminates Original Sin).

Had Adam and Eve not sinned, Grace would be passed along by Divine Providence, not by humans themselves, but as a kind of “conception gift” from God. Since they sinned, however, we are left with only unGraced human nature at conception, and God has instituted a “second birth” of Baptism to aquire the gift that was originally intended to be passed along at conception. It would still have been Grace, a Divine and not human gift, but the timing of its passing on would have been much different.

So, to recap, Adam and Eve (and all their descendents) can only pass on what is natural to them; Grace (Divine Life) is simply not mankind’s to give. So parents who conceive a child give the child what is their own, and that is human nature which happens to be fallen since the sin of Adam and Eve. Even if the parents are given Grace through Baptism, that Grace is not theirs to pass along to their children, but still only God’s since it is His Divine Life and it is above and beyond our human natures. This also allows God to reinforce the notion that Grace is indeed Divine Life, and not merely human life, and that we are saved only by Him and not by ourselves.

To use a worldly example, if I have a house and my friend has loaned me all of the furniture, I can sell the house but the furniture does not go to the purchaser. The house is mine to give, but the furniture remains my friend’s to give or take back as he wishes. 🙂

Peace and God bless!
 
Charles_Darwin said:
I will rephrase, obtuse.

Though it does get rid of the notion that your god is a god of love.
Click to expand...
And when someday (we pray) that you come to believe, you will see that it doesn’t “get rid of the notion”…it reinforces it, it makes it mysteriously understandable.

For He loved us enough to give us a freedom to choose Him or not…which is what makes Love possible…it only exists if it is freely chosen.

The “obtuse” part is based on your lack of understanding about why the first man and woman would choose against Him, and hence how that freely chosen rejection was imparted to us, their descendants.

In a nut shell, Adam and Eve were Graced by God…made in His image. Their rejection DISgraced them. And we were subsequently DISgraced by our natural association to them. Don’t stop there though. The beautiful part is that He loves us still…an unending love…so much so that He made it possible for all future generations, all of us, to return to Grace, and be with Him forever…which is where we were created to be in the first place.

Neither obtuse nor disturbing when the whole story is played out.
 
Ghosty said:
How about looking at it like this: Grace, which is imparted at Baptism and eliminates Original Sin, is not natural to humans. By its very definition it is something extra, the Divine Life added on top of our human nature. What is passed on from the parents is human nature, not Divine Nature, and therefore Grace is not imparted (and again, it is Grace that eliminates Original Sin).

Had Adam and Eve not sinned, Grace would be passed along by Divine Providence, not by humans themselves, but as a kind of “conception gift” from God. Since they sinned, however, we are left with only unGraced human nature at conception, and God has instituted a “second birth” of Baptism to aquire the gift that was originally intended to be passed along at conception. It would still have been Grace, a Divine and not human gift, but the timing of its passing on would have been much different.

So, to recap, Adam and Eve (and all their descendents) can only pass on what is natural to them; Grace (Divine Life) is simply not mankind’s to give. So parents who conceive a child give the child what is their own, and that is human nature which happens to be fallen since the sin of Adam and Eve. Even if the parents are given Grace through Baptism, that Grace is not theirs to pass along to their children, but still only God’s since it is His Divine Life and it is above and beyond our human natures. This also allows God to reinforce the notion that Grace is indeed Divine Life, and not merely human life, and that we are saved only by Him and not by ourselves.

To use a worldly example, if I have a house and my friend has loaned me all of the furniture, I can sell the house but the furniture does not go to the purchaser. The house is mine to give, but the furniture remains my friend’s to give or take back as he wishes. 🙂

Peace and God bless!
Click to expand...
Excellent explanation! God bless you!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top