Eastern view on Original Sin

[mardukm]

I do not understand what you mean when you said:
NOW, if we say the Theotokos died…
See how the immaculate conception grates on eastern ears? She died. Therefore she was subject to the effects of original Sin, and being subject, she must have fought the proclivity to sin at MINIMUM, or perhaps sinned only very minorly , maybe only once.

We believe Mary was born without Original sin. We believe she did die and at the very moment of death was taken up to heaven body & soul.

I think all he meant is that according to the Eastern/Byzantine definition of “Original Sin,” the dogma of the IC might sound strange. But one need not accept the Latin definition of Original Sin in order to accept the dogma of the IC. One only needs to understand that the dogma of the IC refers to Mary’s spiritual state, not her physical state. The proclamation that Mary is Panagia, that she is all-holy, that no stain or defilement ever touched the soul of Mary, would be a sufficient equivalence to the teaching of the IC.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[mardukm]

AS regards the Oriental/Eastern View:

I agree with the Orientals that man is born spiritually dead and does not naturally exist in a state of salvation.

Adam’s Sin caused spiritual death, because it created a spiritual vacuum, which we all know nature abhors:

As long as Adam chose God, who is infinite, he chose to be fulfilled by an infinite good. Therefore, he could experience real satisfaction and fulfillment, for the source he chose was unlimited to meet the eternal desire of the Human soul.

But when Adam chose disobedience, he essentially sought fulfillment in HIMSELF, HIS judgements, HIS decisions. This was like a cosmic explosion of Death because when he chose to be fulfilled by a lesser good which is naturally (even in paradise) incapable of bringing the infinite fulfillment he was formerly seeking in God, he essentially violated the rules of spiritual nature and Material nature. He created a snake eating its own tail, eventually to be self-consumed.

This ushered in Man’s spiritual death. The consequence of which is physical death, for it is the soul that gives life to the body. So Adam ushered in death as a principle, the principle of decay and degeneration that began in the spiritual world and trickled into the physical world via domino effect.

So physical death is also the cause of sin, because we sin because of our fear of death. And our fear is rooted in our spiritual death already. So, like I said, Adam ushered Death as a principle which was first introduced by Lucifer, and Adam allowed it to root itself in this world.

NOW, if we say the Theotokos died…
See how the immaculate conception grates on eastern ears? She died. Therefore she was subject to the effects of original Sin, and being subject, she must have fought the proclivity to sin at MINIMUM, or perhaps sinned only very minorly , maybe only once.

Yet, I am Catholic and believe the Panagia Theotokos was exactly that: Pan-Agia: All-Holy. She was not born spiritually dead. She did die, but so did Christ. And he DEFINITELY was not prone to Sin, although he himself was subject to death.

From the Oriental perspective, according to Pope St. Athanasius and St. Severus, we were made by God naturally mortal. Adam and Eve were not naturally immortal, but were immortal by Grace. What Adam and Eve’s disobedience did was it caused us to lose the Grace of immortality, not that we were transformed to a mortal nature from an immortal nature. Mortality is inherent to human nature, and always has been.

In view of this, I think it is aasier from the Oriental (and Western) perspectives to answer the question of how Christ could die even though He never sinned (or how the Theotokos could die though she never sinned).

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[ConstantineTG]

From the Oriental perspective, according to Pope St. Athanasius and St. Severus, we were made by God naturally mortal. Adam and Eve were not naturally immortal, but were immortal by Grace. What Adam and Eve’s disobedience did was it caused us to lose the Grace of immortality, not that we were transformed to a mortal nature from an immortal nature. Mortality is inherent to human nature, and always has been.

In view of this, I think it is aasier from the Oriental (and Western) perspectives to answer the question of how Christ could die even though He never sinned (or how the Theotokos could die though she never sinned).

Blessings,
Marduk

So at the end of times we will be resurrected in grace and would be immortal for those who will be judged worthy of eternal life?

 

[mardukm]

So at the end of times we will be resurrected in grace and would be immortal for those who will be judged worthy of eternal life?

Yes. As St. Paul teaches, we will be transformed. We will shed mortality for immortality, corruptibility for incorruptibility; the righteous to glory, the unrighteous to condemnation.

Non-Catholic Easterns often argue against the IC from the standpoint of the aphorism “what Christ has not put on he has not transformed.” This comes from a misunderstanding of the teaching of the IC. The Grace of the IC did not affect the body of the Theotokos, only her soul. So Christ indeed put on our mortality/our corruptibility from Mary, though not indeed our sinfulness. It is our mortality/corruptibility that He transformed by His resurrection.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[Gregory_I]

I have heard that before, and I agree. It is somewhat scriptural too…Why eat from a tree of life if you can live forever naturally? Seems like death is implicitly in the background, even in paradise.

Marduk-

After reading your posts and other Copts, it seem to me that Oriental Theology Lands pretty Much right between the Byzantine THeologians, and the Latin Theologians. Why is that?

 

[Formosus]

From the Oriental perspective, according to Pope St. Athanasius and St. Severus, we were made by God naturally mortal. Adam and Eve were not naturally immortal, but were immortal by Grace. What Adam and Eve’s disobedience did was it caused us to lose the Grace of immortality, not that we were transformed to a mortal nature from an immortal nature. Mortality is inherent to human nature, and always has been.

In view of this, I think it is aasier from the Oriental (and Western) perspectives to answer the question of how Christ could die even though He never sinned (or how the Theotokos could die though she never sinned).
Blessings,
Marduk

Just to provide a comparison,

My understanding of the Eastern(Byzantine) view is that the natural state of Man is to be in communion with God’s energies and I would think this means that we are naturally meant for immortality. Adam and Eve’s fall introduced death into the world, which then introduced the passions and thus separation from God’s Grace.

-to Gregory

I think it was actually called the Tree of Good and Evil if I remember right.

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Gregory,

After reading your posts and other Copts, it seem to me that Oriental Theology Lands pretty Much right between the Byzantine THeologians, and the Latin Theologians. Why is that?

I can surmise 3 possible reasons:

1. Geographically speaking, the Oriental Church was poised to influence and be influenced by both Western and Eastern sources.
2. The West was never seen as the oppressor of the Orient, because the oppressive secular power was held by the Easterns. So it’s possible that the Orient had a more sympathetic attitude for exchange of ideas with the West over the centuries.
3. West, East, and Orient were more alike in the ancient days than we are now. West and East diverged from the fundamental standard through developments that were urged by local exigencies (in West and East, respectively). This divergence was exacerbated by the tensions between the West and East themselves. Further developments occurred as a result of reaction or overreaction to each other (i.e., West and East). This resulted in a situation where, while West and East seemed to differ ever more sharply, the Orient, having undergone the least amount of development, represented elements from both West and East. In truth, the Orient is simply reflecting the primordial state of the early Church, when there was more similarity between all Traditions than there are now.

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Formosus,

My understanding of the Eastern(Byzantine) view is that the natural state of Man is to be in communion with God’s energies and I would think this means that we are naturally meant for immortality.

I suspect this is actually a common teaching in West, East, and Orient.

Adam and Eve’s fall introduced death into the world, which then introduced the passions and thus separation from God’s Grace.

Thank you for the comparison. From the Athanasian pespective, the passions came through concupiscence (i.e., the disordered use of reason). As with death and corruptibility, this was a result of the loss of Grace, or separation from God. So in the Oriental understanding, separation from God is the root of all other effects of the original sin.

I think it was actually called the Tree of Good and Evil if I remember right.

Genesis 2 (IIRC) identifies both the Tree of Life (from which Adam and Eve could eat) and the Tree of Good and Evil (from which Adam and Eve could not eat).

Blessings,
Marduk

 

[GaryTaylor]

I don’t see where there is any difference in the facts of Original Sin with East or Rome in Christian theology, All the same.

Man was offered to come into full communion with God. Man refused through Adam and Eve and Original Sin thus became a reality.

Man in many regards still refuse’s and wrestles with this to date. In many ways we as the human race have forgotten our own history, or would like to focus on other foolish theories.

 

[Fr_Kyrillos]

“Man was mortal by the very nature of his body, but immortal by grace.”
(St. Augustine)

“By nature man is mortal, since he is created from nothing,” and at their origin men “were endowed with a corruptible nature, but by the grace of participation in the Word” they could “escape their condition of their nature” since, “because of the Word present with them, the corruption of their nature could not approach them.”
(St. Athanasius)

“Yet someone will say to us, ‘But wasn’t death a natural function of human nature?’ Not at all! ‘Wasn’t man therefore immortal?’ We do not say that either. They will then reply, ‘Do you mean man was nothing at all?’ No, that is not at all what we mean. Rather, by his nature man was no more mortal than immortal. If he had been created immortal from the beginning, he would have been created divine. On the other hand, if he had been created mortal, it would have appeared that God was the cause of his death. Thus he was created neither mortal nor immortal; rather, he was capable of both mortality and immortality. Had he chosen the way of immortality in following the divine commandment, he would have received the gift of immortality as a recompense, and thus he would have become like God. Since instead he turned towards works of death in disobedience to God, he became himself the cause of his own death. So it is that God created man free and master of his own destiny.”
(St. Theophilus of Antioch, 2nd Cent.)

“Knowing that man’s free will could have inclined him to one choice or the other, God took the initiative and strengthened the grace that He had given man by providing him with the commandment already in the Garden. In that way, insofar as man preserved that grace and dwelt in virtue, he would know in Paradise a life free from sadness, pain and anxiety, together with the promise of immortality in heaven. But if man transgressed that commandment, he would know that in death he would experience the corruption of his nature, and that he would no longer live in Paradise but would have been expelled, to die and to dwell henceforth in death and corruption.”
(St. Athanasius)

“For the first creature, disobedience procured exclusion from Paradise; in his disobedience, man acquired fatigue, suffering and distress, and finally he fell into the power of death.”
(St. Theophilus of Antioch)

“From where do we get our weaknesses, illnesses and other evils that give rise to death? From where does death itself come? From our disobedience to the divine commandment, from transgression of the precept which God gave to us, from our original sin in the Paradise of God. Thus sicknesses, infirmities and the weight of all sorts of trials are the result of sin.”
(Gregory Palamas)

“This rejection of the Good, once accomplished, had as a consequence the appearance of all forms of evil: the fact that man turned away from life led to death; by depriving himself of the light, he fell into darkness; lacking virtue, evil appeared in his life, and thus it is that all forms of good were one by one replaced by a series of opposite evils.”
(St. Gregory of Nyssa)

 

[Shin]

Thank you for the quotes. This is what I love.