I believe my post #95 is sufficiently clear.Christ took on the fulness of our fallen nature but He did not become a sinner because that is an aspect of the will. It was through this that the fallen nature was healed. We recieve the nature of Christ through baptism and the Eucharist and so we are saved as well.
mardukm, are you limiting the fall to the loss of the Grace of immortality?
Blessings,When Man fell, three things occurred:
- Man lost the Grace of Immortality and the Grace of Incorruptibility. These are, strictly speaking, the main components of what are called the TEMPORAL.PHYSICAL consequences of Oriignal Sin. Thus, Man was subject to his NATURAL state of PHYSICAL death and corruptibility.
- Man lost the Graces of Original Holiness and Original Justice. These are, strictly speaking, the main components of what are known as the SPIRITUAL consequences - or the STAIN - of Original Sin. This is the direct cause of SPIRITUAL DEATH, or separation from God.
- Man’s natural powers were darkened or wounded. I.e., his reason became disordered, and the vision of his immortality was darkened. This is what is known as CONCUPISCENCE. Concupiscence is, strictly speaking, a spiritual consequence, since its effects are spiritual (i.e., they lead to sinful actions) and is thus included in the definition of the “stain” of original sin.
I disagree if by the term “fulness” you mean to say that Christ had concupiscence or that he lacked Original holiness and Justice.Christ took on the fulness of our fallen nature but He did not become a sinner because that is an aspect of the will. It was through this that the fallen nature was healed. We recieve the nature of Christ through baptism and the Eucharist and so we are saved as well.
In lieu of this, I would like to point out something. Sinfulness is not part of our nature. We are by nature good. Sin/sinfulness are stains (or filth or blemishes or whatever you want to call it). Death and corruptibility, however, are indeed part of our nature. That is why Scripture consistently teaches us that whereas sin will be REMOVED, in dramatic distinction, it says that our corruptibility will be CHANGED or TRANSFORMED to incorruptibility.I disagree if by the term “fulness” you mean to say that Christ had concupiscence or that he lacked Original holiness and Justice.
What Christ took on was our fallen human NATURE. He took on what is NATURAL to us as human beings. Death and corruptibility are natural to us. It is our nature. It is “fallen” insofar as Adam caused humanity to fall from the state of possessing the GRACE of immortality and incorruptibility. However, sin or sinfulness is not “natural” to us. That is why the Catholic Church calls it a “stain.” St. Athanasius called it “filth.” This stain on our nature Christ never inherited.
Are you sure about that? From my current understanding of modern EO teaching on the matter, the Cappadocians are FAAAAR from supporting their views on Original Sin. St. Basil taught that sinfulness is inherited from our first parents, not as a consequence of physical death, but as a direct result of the Fall (“Little given, much gotten; by the donation of food the original sin is discharged. Just as Adam transmitted the sin by his wicked eating, we destroy that treacherous food when we cure the need and hunger of our brother.” At a TIme of Famine and Drought 8,7). St. Gregory Nazianzen taught that children who are not baptized will be excluded from the glory of heaven, though not suffer the pains of hell (Oration on Holy Baptism, 23). St. Gregory Nyssa was the most “Latin” of all, teaching that in baptism “the evil features which blemish our nature have been obliterated” (The Great Catechism, XL).Even if we look to On the Incarnation by St. Athanasius we find comparing our original state of grace in immortality with a new state in death needing ‘rebirth’ to renew. I simply don’t find the “modern” Orthodox apologetic in history and that really concerns me because they appear to have emphasized the Cappadocian Fathers over the consensus of the whole faith in order to present an alternative to historic Catholic Theology.
One of the lasting effects of Adams sin is the weakness towards sin of all Adam’s children, and mortal death of Adam’s progeny. Neither is the stain of original sin; that causes us to be born already distanced from God. They are, instead, changes to reality caused by Adam’s sin. It is the nature of free will that we are corruptible.In lieu of this, I would like to point out something. Sinfulness is not part of our nature. We are by nature good. Sin/sinfulness are stains (or filth or blemishes or whatever you want to call it). Death and corruptibility, however, are indeed part of our nature. That is why Scripture consistently teaches us that whereas sin will be REMOVED, in dramatic distinction, it says that our corruptibility will be CHANGED or TRANSFORMED to incorruptibility.
In relation to our topic, this helps us understand why the dogma of the IC in no way violates the ancient aphorism that “what is not taken on in nature is not perfected.”
Blessings
100% in agreement.One of the lasting effects of Adams sin is the weakness towards sin of all Adam’s children, and mortal death of Adam’s progeny. Neither is the stain of original sin; that causes us to be born already distanced from God. They are, instead, changes to reality caused by Adam’s sin.
This is the only part I am doubtful about. According to our holy Father Pope St. Athanasius, we are corruptible because the use of our reason has been damaged - which is concupiscence. Our free will is damaged because of concupiscence, This is also the teaching of St. Basil (off the top of my head). But I suppose one could assign it to the “nature of free will” if one defines the use of reason to be an indispensable part of free will.It is the nature of free will that we are corruptible.
Without free will, the damaged reason would not cause us to be in sin.Dear brother Aramis,
100% in agreement.
This is the only part I am doubtful about. According to our holy Father Pope St. Athanasius, we are corruptible because the use of our reason has been damaged - which is concupiscence. Our free will is damaged because of concupiscence, This is also the teaching of St. Basil (off the top of my head). But I suppose one could assign it to the “nature of free will” if one defines the use of reason to be an indispensable part of free will.
Blessings,
Marduk