L
Luke_K
Guest
Since the soul is created by God and not inherited from the parents, why is our soul deprived of sanctifying grace? How is it possible that our soul inherits original sin?
How is Original Sin inherited if the soul is created immediately by God?
- Status
T
tonyrey
Guest
“Since the soul is created by God and not inherited from the parents, why is our soul deprived of sanctifying grace? How is it possible that our soul inherits original sin?”
We are not isolated individuals but members of one family, all of us being the children of Our Father in heaven. We are affected - positively and negatively - by what our ancestors have done both spiritually and physically - for better and for worse… We inherit original “virtue” as well as original “sin”! In neither case are we responsible for their legacy.
We are not isolated individuals but members of one family, all of us being the children of Our Father in heaven. We are affected - positively and negatively - by what our ancestors have done both spiritually and physically - for better and for worse… We inherit original “virtue” as well as original “sin”! In neither case are we responsible for their legacy.
F
Frere
Guest
Yes, we are not as ‘individualized’ as our modern society tend to convince us.
We are naturally connected. We are someone’s sons (or daughters). What is eternal and divine is the ‘son’ principle. But what is ‘temporal’ is human.
So God loves us into being and we show up as ‘sons/daughters’. But human sons/daughters. To be saved we need to be ‘born’ of above, of the Holy Spirit, so that we are spiritual offspring and free from corruption.
I see that we inherit original sin the same way a child who is born of an imprisoned mother, is born in prison. This child inherit the prison although s/he did not commit any crime. But God is faithful and can not go back to his Word. If every many must be born of a mother, then, we are born wherever our mothers are. This is the original design of God according to his love. He desired us to be born in love. But our parents corrupted the love.
This also explains why Christ had to come. Because the justice of God also wants the child to be free. It is not God who condemn us to be born in misery, but our parents by corrupting love. So Christ came to set us free. When we are born in the Spirit, we are born in Freedom: new birth in freedom.
We must keep in mind that ‘sin’ is not just what is done, but where we are. Being out of place is being in sin. Being at the wrong place is being in sin.
I heard that in original Hebrew language, sinning means ‘missing the mark’.
We are naturally connected. We are someone’s sons (or daughters). What is eternal and divine is the ‘son’ principle. But what is ‘temporal’ is human.
So God loves us into being and we show up as ‘sons/daughters’. But human sons/daughters. To be saved we need to be ‘born’ of above, of the Holy Spirit, so that we are spiritual offspring and free from corruption.
I see that we inherit original sin the same way a child who is born of an imprisoned mother, is born in prison. This child inherit the prison although s/he did not commit any crime. But God is faithful and can not go back to his Word. If every many must be born of a mother, then, we are born wherever our mothers are. This is the original design of God according to his love. He desired us to be born in love. But our parents corrupted the love.
This also explains why Christ had to come. Because the justice of God also wants the child to be free. It is not God who condemn us to be born in misery, but our parents by corrupting love. So Christ came to set us free. When we are born in the Spirit, we are born in Freedom: new birth in freedom.
We must keep in mind that ‘sin’ is not just what is done, but where we are. Being out of place is being in sin. Being at the wrong place is being in sin.
I heard that in original Hebrew language, sinning means ‘missing the mark’.
A
Areopagite
Guest
When you say “deprived” it seems to imply that we SHOULD have sanctifying grace by nature. But this is a heresy. Human nature, by nature, does not have sanctifying grace. Otherwise, it would imply that we are divine by our very nature. When God supplied sanctifying grace to Adam and Eve and intended to do so with their descendants, this was a gratuitous gesture. God didn’t have to do that. He had no obligation to do that. But that was the situation which He graciously set up for us. This privilege was withdrawn with Adam’s sin. And yet, God is offering another way to regain this gift … but it is a gift and not part of what makes us human. It makes us divine.
When we say that Adam’s descendants “inherits” original sin, this means that Adam’s descendants don’t get that grace which they WOULD have automatically received if Adam had not sinned. However, since Adam did sin, God does not immediately supply this supernatural bonus to human children. It only comes by way of the sacraments (or yes, possibly by other gratuitous acts of God that we are unaware of, which, once again, God has no obligation to give).
Does that make sense?
Correct me if I’m wrong, anybody. Maybe I’m missing something.
L
Luke_K
Guest
It’s not heresy. It’s the teaching of Catholicism.
Also see the first question on this link: catholic.com/thisrock/quickquestions/keyword/original%20sin/page2
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
Allow me to interject on how the East views the fall and human nature. As Blessed Pope John Paul II and other Popes has said, that Christian truth sometimes is best explained by one tradition over another, so perhaps seeing the view from the East may make us understand the truth better.
It is not heresy. We were created in the image and likeness of God. Adam and Eve were created with the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, thus we have sanctifying grace. The ability of the Holy Spirit to dwell within us was lost at The Fall. That is what baptism restores, that the Holy Spirit may dwell within us again and we may receive graces from God. That is our original nature. That is what Christ restored by his death and resurrection.
The Eastern view is that we do not inherit anything from Adam. Adam’s sin damaged the very nature we have. We are born into this damaged nature. It will only be restored fully when Christ restores creation at the end of time. For now when we are baptized, we open ourselves again to God’s graces.
H
Heuchler
Guest
I’d say it is the fact that humanity as a whole is filled with original sin. Just as all fish are underwater, all humans are sinners. So, its not like something that passes down it is a condition similar to the way that most humans see colors. Its just the way things are since the beginning when color was interpreted by the eyes. So, humanity is physcially created to be not perfect and it is because we are human we gain attributes of humanity. We see and think in about the same as every other human. Our wills are similar. Our souls may be created by God but that does not mean that God preserves them from our human-ness which because of that original sin also includes a fallen nature.
A
Areopagite
Guest
What exactly isn’t heresy? I said that by nature we don’t have divine life in us. If divinity was part of our nature, then we would always be God … no matter what. I think that’s heresy. Are you denying that? What exactly are you saying isn’t heresy? Be clear.
The James Akin quote you directed me to says that “deprivation” can imply not only the loss of something natural to a thing but also the loss of something not natural to a thing that was nonetheless previously given to a thing. Fair enough. I suppose you could “deprive someone of their privileges.” Yeah, I hadn’t thought of that particular use of the word. I stand corrected.
But if this is how you were using the word “deprived” then what’s the problem? Or rather what exactly are you asking? Sanctifying grace is a privilege that humans do not need to have in order to be human. Right? (am I wrong about this? please, someone, correct me if I’m wrong)
This privilege was going to be given by God to Adam’s offspring as well if he didn’t sin. So it’s not genetics that actually cause deprivation of grace. It’s God who does that … but He has no obligation to provide it since it’s a gift. (but as I said before, He nonetheless offers it again through the Church)
I might be missing your point. There is perhaps something about the “stain of original sin” that I might be overlooking. But as your question stands, you are asking about original sin itself (which is merely the absence of sanctifying grace that God intended to automatically give all Adam’s descendants but was nonetheless not part of their nature) … you’re not asking about what is called concupiscence.
Maybe I’m being vague as well as missing your point. And maybe I’m just wrong too.
Absolutely. I agree with that. And I love Byzantine Catholicism. I listen to a lot of Byzantine chant.:extrahappy:
As far as I understand. The “image of God” refers to our rationality, which does reflect divine nature insofar as we can grasp things intellectually and possess free will. However, the image of something is not the same thing as that something. Hence, our rationality does not make us divine by nature. It is a reflection of the divine but certainly not the same thing as divine power.
Our “likeness” refers to sanctifying grace. However (as I remember hearing somewhere … forgive the lack of citations), this likeness was lost on account of Adam’s sin. Hence, humans are no longer born with the likeness of God. Sure, Adam was created with sanctifying grace, but this does not mean it was part of his human nature. Any Christian can, at any time, through mortal sin, lose that likeness. Hence, just because Adam was made in the likeness of God, doesn’t mean we are divine by nature. The likeness was a gift.
I pretty much agree. But since we can lose the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, that implies it’s not a part of human nature, otherwise we would cease being human altogether whenever we commit mortal sin.
So I’m not sure what you’re disagreeing with me about.
Depending on what that means, I would agree. We don’t inherit anything with positive existence. Instead when we come into being we simply don’t have grace, though we we WOULD have inherited sanctifying grace from him if he hadn’t sinned.
And maybe this is the weakness in my argument. I think original sin is simply the absence of grace that God would have given us if Adam hadn’t sin. Though I also think (and I suppose I’ve misleadingly omitted this before) that even when we regain sanctifying grace through the Church, we don’t receive the extra power that Adam also had, namely complete governance of his reason over his passions (that is we have "concupiscence … the “stain of original sin”). I suppose I’m unclear what this power was. Was this a natural power or necessarily supernatural? I actually have no clue. Wow, yeah. I think I’m really showing my ignorance here. Can anyone help me out?
C
ConstantineTG
Guest
Definitely. I like the slavic tones more. Maybe I’m biased
You have gotten most of of it right. Have you heard of theosis? In the West it is not as much emphasized as it is in the East. In the East we see it as our main goal in life, to achieve godliness. God became man so that man may become gods. It means we are to be partakers of the divine nature, without approaching equality of God’s nature of course. It means that our end goal now was originally the nature of human beings. In the beginning we possessed that dignity. Its not just intellect and free will, but the very nature of ours we partake of God’s divine nature. That is why during creation, everything else was called good. Only man was called “very good”.
God intended it to be part of human nature. But Adam altered human nature by what he did.
We are still not perfected. That is why we must die and then be resurrected. That is why the glorified body is different from our bodies today. Remember that Adam and Eve has beatific vision. The communed with God, talked with Him and walked with Him. Today that is enjoyed by the saints. As long as we live in this fallen world in this fallen state, we do not receive the fullness of that perfect nature.
I think you’re 90% correct, but there’s still a few things that need to be clarified.
You sound like an Eastern Christian to me
I always explain it this way. Western theology sees it as we are born with something that shouldn’t be there, which is original sin. Eastern theology sees it that we are born without something that should be there, which is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit.
I think you actually got most of the Eastern view spot on, with only a few minor adjustments
Baptism enables us to receive God’s graces again, but it doesn’t perfect our nature. We are still fallen. Our nature will only be perfected at the end of times when we are all resurrected, and those worthy will receive glorified bodies. By then we would have shed the imperfection of our fallen nature and would have received perfection through Christ.
T
Trevor_Stamm
Guest
Brake pedal, due to grammatical confusion. Are you saying Adam & Eve had the beatific vision, as in past tense before they sinned, or they have now the beatific vision today in heaven?
If it’s past tense, I was under the impression the beatific vision prevents beings from sinning at all, that it is the missing link to our incomplete nature until we are in heaven.
If you were speaking presently, nevermind.
If I could, I’d like to hear your thoughts on a thread I made forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=593556
Pax
B
benedictus2
Guest
Because original sin pertains to the human nature not just the soul. We are body and soul. If the soul had just remained soul, then there would not be original sin to speak of as there would not be a human being. As St Paul referred to it - this body of death.
R
razredge
Guest
This depends on the model of Original Sin - some theories of OS like Cardinal Ratzinger’s relational model do not have problems with this at all.
- Status