Inheriting Sin

  • Thread starter Thread starter ClemtheCatholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

ClemtheCatholic

Guest
Why do we inherit sin and sinful inclinations and how is it fair?
 
If we had no interest in doing evil we would be robots. I want to love God freely, not simply obey because that’s how I’m programmed.
 
ClemtheCatholic said:
Why do we inherit sin and sinful inclinations and how is it fair?
Click to expand...
Maybe you could consider the concept of anxiety? We don’t inherrit sin necessarily, but simply the anxiety over its potential. The anxiety isn’t necessarily bad, it is actually the source of freedom. It was the source of Adam’s sin (although it isn’t sinful in itself), and we have it is the source of our sins. Freedom manifests itself in anxiety, and we make ourselves sinners through our own actions.
 
ClemtheCatholic said:
Why do we inherit sin and sinful inclinations and how is it fair?
Click to expand...
This may help:

*(2) It is unjust, says another objection, that from the sin of one man should result the decadence of the whole human race. This would have weight if we took this decadence in the same sense that Luther took it, i.e. human reason incapable of understanding even moral truths, free will destroyed, the very substance of man changed into evil.

But according to Catholic theology man has not lost his natural faculties: by the sin of Adam he has been deprived only of the Divine gifts to which his nature had no strict right, the complete mastery of his passions, exemption from death, sanctifying grace, the vision of God in the next life. The Creator, whose gifts were not due to the human race, had the right to bestow them on such conditions as He wished and to make their conservation depend on the fidelity of the head of the family. A prince can confer a hereditary dignity on condition that the recipient remains loyal, and that, in case of his rebelling, this dignity shall be taken from him and, in consequence, from his descendants…*

From The Cath. Ency. article on ‘Original Sin’
 
ClemtheCatholic said:
Why do we inherit sin and sinful inclinations and how is it fair?
Click to expand...
Now…this is a fascinating inquiry. One might ask does not the increasing pull toward evil make us more prone to sin than in previous ages…For example, Adam had a mere preference as his only path to sin…we grow up today in a world that pushes sin in our face from a thousand directions…is that fair?

Brother, perhaps we are more blessed than any previous people BECAUSE we are subjected to this heavier onslaught.

Did it ever occur to you that God chose a Path of creation that would glean the most fruit…the quantative most souls of… various qualities that only God knows? These “various qualities” may have a lot to do with how and where such souls overcome the onslaught.
 
ClemtheCatholic said:
Why do we inherit sin and sinful inclinations and how is it fair?
Click to expand...
One thing that helps me to embrace this reality is the analogy of God as Potter and we are His clay. He has the right to make of us and do with us whatever He wants.

*Isaiah 64.8, “we are the clay, and you are our potter; we are all the work of your hand.”
*
Romans 9.21, “Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use?”
 
I believe this is covered pretty extensively in the Catechism. You could also read the Compendium to the Catechism. Also, Fultin Sheen wrote some wonderful books. I read The Life of Christ- really wonderful book.
 
grannymh said:
What sin are you referring to when you say “we inherit sin”?
Are inclinations actual sins? If so, what sins are you referring to?
Click to expand...
The main thing I have in mind is the idea that the Church cannot say for sure if the unborn make it to Heaven.
 
ClemtheCatholic said:
The main thing I have in mind is the idea that the Church cannot say for sure if the unborn make it to Heaven.
Click to expand...
The human person does not inherit a personal sin.

What all “unborns” inherit is a state (Original Sin) which is the lack of original holiness. Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s sanctifying grace, erases Original Sin and turnss the person back to God.

Because Christ hung bleeding on the cross for all and since all of us, from the moment of our conception, are called to the same destiny which is sharing in God’s Divine life, the Catholic Church holds that the Holy Spirit offers to all this possibility. As for children, including the unborn, who have died without Baptism, the Church entrusts them to the mercy of God. This mercy should not be underestimated by mortal humans. We need to recognize that our Divine God has bound salvation to the Sacrament of Baptism, but God as the ultimate Creator is not bound by His creation. It is not necessary for us to judge God in matters of His Divine Mercy.
 
So is Original Sin more of a restraint like a bar to holiness or is it actually a stain on our souls like other sin?
 
ClemtheCatholic said:
So is Original Sin more of a restraint like a bar to holiness or is it actually a stain on our souls like other sin?
Click to expand...
Based on this for the Catechism it is neither:
404 How did the sin of Adam become the sin of all his descendants? The whole human race is in Adam “as one body of one man”.293 By this “unity of the human race” all men are implicated in Adam’s sin, as all are implicated in Christ’s justice. Still, the transmission of original sin is a mystery that we cannot fully understand. But we do know by Revelation that Adam had received original holiness and justice not for himself alone, but for all human nature. By yielding to the tempter, Adam and Eve committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state.294 It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice. And that is why original sin is called “sin” only in an analogical sense: it is a sin “contracted” and not “committed” - a state and not an act.

405 Although it is proper to each individual,295 original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called “concupiscence”. Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.

406 The Church’s teaching on the transmission of original sin was articulated more precisely in the fifth century, especially under the impulse of St. Augustine’s reflections against Pelagianism, and in the sixteenth century, in opposition to the Protestant Reformation. Pelagius held that man could, by the natural power of free will and without the necessary help of God’s grace, lead a morally good life; he thus reduced the influence of Adam’s fault to bad example. The first Protestant reformers, on the contrary, taught that original sin has radically perverted man and destroyed his freedom; they identified the sin inherited by each man with the tendency to evil (concupiscentia), which would be insurmountable. The Church pronounced on the meaning of the data of Revelation on original sin especially at the second Council of Orange (529)296 and at the Council of Trent (1546).297
Click to expand...
 
davidv said:
Based on this for the Catechism it is neither:
Click to expand...
Thanks for digging that up, it is very interesting.

I wonder what distinction the catechism would make between “the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined toward evil” of paragraph 405, and “the tendency to evil” of paragraph 406.
 
cap76 said:
Thanks for digging that up, it is very interesting.

I wonder what distinction the catechism would make between “the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined toward evil” of paragraph 405, and “the tendency to evil” of paragraph 406.
Click to expand...
Because paragraph 406 is in smaller print, it falls under paragraphs 20 -21 in the Catechism section, Practical Directions for Using This Catechism, page 17.

Paragraph 406 further explains paragraph 405 by presenting the distinction between the Catholic teaching regarding the status of human nature after the Fall and the status proposed by the Protestant reformers. We have a wounded human nature not one that is totally corrupted as maintained by some of the reformers. With such a radically perverted nature, the conclusion was that the tendency to evil would be insurmountable. We would be born bad because the tendency to sin was identified with Original Sin itself.

Whereas Catholicism teaches that it is possible, with God’s grace, to resist the temptations of triple concupiscence listed in paragraph 377. The inclination to sin is one of the consequences of Original Sin and not an element of the Sin itself.
 
ClemtheCatholic said:
So is Original Sin more of a restraint like a bar to holiness or is it actually a stain on our souls like other sin?
Click to expand...
Many years before our current universal *Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition *was published, the concept of Original Sin as a “stain on our soul” was often taught because a stain does not completely destroy and it can be erased. Yet, this “stain” is so strong that it could be considered somewhat like a bar to God’s presence within us.

Please look at post 14 above which has Catechism paragraphs 404 & 405.
The last line of CCC 404 has the better description of Original Sin. “And that is why original sin is called “sin” only in an analogical sense: it is a sin “contracted” and not “committed” - a state and not an act.” The last line in CCC 405 is “Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.” Baptism removes all restraints or bars to God’s sanctifying presence.

If you start with CCC 396 and keep studying through CCC 409, you will get a clearer idea of the unique seriousness of Original Sin. This sin is totally different from the personal sins we commit.

I am grateful for our current Catechism because it goes deeper into the specifics of Original Sin. It makes what Adam did so much easier to understand.

What distinguishes Original Sin from our current personal sins is its source.
The source of Original Sin is the one, first human being, Adam. Adam began life in friendship with his Creator. In other words, because of his rational spiritual soul, he could share in God’s divine life. This is what is meant by humans being created in the image of God. In the state of original holiness or in the state of sanctifying grace are other good descriptions of ourselves when we are in God’s friendship. Because of our very nature, we are capable of a true relationship with our Creator.

Sometimes we overlook the difference between Adam and ourselves and therefore we do not go deeper into what it meant to be the first human being. For me, the best description of Adam is that the whole human race is in him “as one body of one man.” (CCC 404)
 
grannymh said:
Many years before our current universal *Catechism of the Catholic Church, Second Edition *was published, the concept of Original Sin as a “stain on our soul” was often taught because a stain does not completely destroy and it can be erased. Yet, this “stain” is so strong that it could be considered somewhat like a bar to God’s presence within us.

Please look at post 14 above which has Catechism paragraphs 404 & 405.
The last line of CCC 404 has the better description of Original Sin. “And that is why original sin is called “sin” only in an analogical sense: it is a sin “contracted” and not “committed” - a state and not an act.” The last line in CCC 405 is “Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.” Baptism removes all restraints or bars to God’s sanctifying presence.

If you start with CCC 396 and keep studying through CCC 409, you will get a clearer idea of the unique seriousness of Original Sin. This sin is totally different from the personal sins we commit.

I am grateful for our current Catechism because it goes deeper into the specifics of Original Sin. It makes what Adam did so much easier to understand.

What distinguishes Original Sin from our current personal sins is its source.
The source of Original Sin is the one, first human being, Adam. Adam began life in friendship with his Creator. In other words, because of his rational spiritual soul, he could share in God’s divine life. This is what is meant by humans being created in the image of God. In the state of original holiness or in the state of sanctifying grace are other good descriptions of ourselves when we are in God’s friendship. Because of our very nature, we are capable of a true relationship with our Creator.

Sometimes we overlook the difference between Adam and ourselves and therefore we do not go deeper into what it meant to be the first human being. For me, the best description of Adam is that the whole human race is in him “as one body of one man.” (CCC 404)
Click to expand...
Thanks very much! This is much clearer now. 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top