Is Genesis 2: 15-17 an explanation of Original Sin?

[grannymh]

Some serious thinking about the Catholic Big Tent which welcomes all sinners and all nations.

What happens when a Tent resident sincerely believes that Jesus Christ is an itinerant preacher and holds the Jesus Seminar as the bearer of truth?
What happens when another Tent resident sincerely believes that chapter 6, Gospel of John is symbolic as found in a variety of Christian Faiths?
What happens when another Tent resident sincerely believes that the basic meaning of Original Sin is silly and follows the teachings of the Center for Action and Contemplation?

Are all these “truths” acceptable as Big Tent Catholic truths in order to be peacefully friendly? Should certain Catholic teachings about the first three fascinating chapters be dropped in the name of welcome?

When Catholics feed the poor, should Catholics alter their truths so that the poor feel comfortable? When Catholics work for justice, should Catholics drop the Real Presence of Jesus Christ, because not all residents of the Catholic Big Tent believe that?

Does equal love demand that unequal Catholic truths have to be dropped?

What really happens when annoying Catholic doctrines are placed under the welcome mat?

Pope Pius XII answered those questions. Modern Catholicism has not been able to change those answers because the Catholic Church refuses to change Divine Revelation, including that which follows from the first three chapters of Sacred Scripture.

 

[cfauster]

Another point of the parable - perhaps the main part - is the extravagant welcome extended to the returning prodigal, wayward child. Praise be to God.

Recognizing our waywardness is the start. I suspect that the Prodigal Son realized his father was generous, etc. from the start because (for example) the son had the audacity to request his inheritance early! What the son did not realize until later, of course, is that freedom to sin becomes slavery to sin if we abuse the freedom.

I need to correct some errors in what I wrote above.

Reflecting more on the parable, I really do think the main point is the forgiveness offered freely by the father (representing God). So now I would delete “perhaps” from that sentence.

Two other corrections:

1. I retract my statement that the prodigal son realized his father was generous from the start. Now I suspect that prodigal character in the parable was meant to represent a view that fails to recognize God’s generosity, fails to recognize that all is a gift from God, and instead insists on grasping “what’s mine” and focusing on oneself. His resources ran out, however, because he wasted them. Finally he realized that the hired hands working back home on the family farm ate better than he did feeding pigs in a far country. He had “burned his bridges”, or so he thought, as a family member but at least he thought he could return as a hired hand or servant of his father. So, he returns.
2. That sets up the main point of the parable - the unconditional joy of the father at recovering his lost son. The father did not say “Well, look who finally came to his senses and came home! Wow, did you ever make a mess of your life! Where have you been, in a pig sty? Are you going to behave better now? Well, we’ll see. Take a shower and clean up before coming into the house…” No, the main point of the parable is that, thanks to Christ, the only remaining barrier to our reconciliation with God is our lack of interest in being reconciled. Yes, admitting our sin is necessary. Yes, we need to repent - daily, in fact. But we can take heart and confess our sin and need for salvation confidently, because God has taken the initiative to seek and save the lost. No reason to remain lost. If we deny our tendency (called original sin) to wander away from God and get lost in a “far country,” well, then we might not come home from the far country, but God “leaves the light on for us,” always wanting us to return, daily. We will continue to fall to temptation, wander, and sin but we can also continue to get up, turn back towards home, and follow Christ. Through the grace of discipleship we can learn to imitate Christ, never perfectly in this life but hopefully more closely as we grow in love towards God and neighbor.

 

[cfauster]

Some serious thinking about the Catholic Big Tent which welcomes all sinners and all nations.

What happens when a Tent resident sincerely believes that Jesus Christ is an itinerant preacher and holds the Jesus Seminar as the bearer of truth?
What happens when another Tent resident sincerely believes that chapter 6, Gospel of John is symbolic as found in a variety of Christian Faiths?
What happens when another Tent resident sincerely believes that the basic meaning of Original Sin is silly and follows the teachings of the Center for Action and Contemplation?

Are all these “truths” acceptable as Big Tent Catholic truths in order to be peacefully friendly? Should certain Catholic teachings about the first three fascinating chapters be dropped in the name of welcome?

I think I understand what you are saying. If the hard truths of our sin and need for salvation are ignored or watered down, we might become deluded into thinking we are God-like rather than creatures, and we might not recognize when we are wandering away from God into a far country.

The law (bad news) serves an important role in making us receptive to the gospel (good news).

When Catholics feed the poor, should Catholics alter their truths so that the poor feel comfortable? When Catholics work for justice, should Catholics drop the Real Presence of Jesus Christ, because not all residents of the Catholic Big Tent believe that?

Does equal love demand that unequal Catholic truths have to be dropped?

What really happens when annoying Catholic doctrines are placed under the welcome mat?

Where I live - as elsewhere, I’m sure - I see Catholics feeding the poor, working for justice, etc. They do so without regard to whether those they serve are Catholic or not. I’m sure we all value such work.

If anyone recognizes the grace manifested in the lives of those faithful Catholics and inquires about themselves joining the Catholic church, of course the instruction in doctrine will be given. I doubt the important truths you mentioned are ignored, dropped, or placed under a mat. On the contrary, I imagine they are regarded as precious treasures to be shared with others open to hearing the truth and being reconciled to God.

 

[goout]

…
The Big Tent Religious Shelter aka Big Tent is a place where the Catholic Holy Sacrifice of the Mass cannot be celebrated because it violates the beliefs of some of the inhabitants in the Tent.
…is not a parody. It is a possibility in the future. It is a possibility which could happen if we do not take seriously the warning of Pope Pius XII, Humani Generis, chapters 11& 12

Link to Humani Generis
w2.vatican.va/content/pius-xii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_12081950_humani-generis.html

What specifically are you addressing iin Humanii Generis?

 

[grannymh]

I think I understand what you are saying. If the hard truths of our sin and need for salvation are ignored or watered down, we might become deluded into thinking we are God-like rather than creatures, and we might not recognize when we are wandering away from God into a far country.

The law (bad news) serves an important role in making us receptive to the gospel (good news).

I do not like to break that bubble.

But, unfortunately, that good concept is miles away from the real hard truths. One real hard truth is that the Catholic Church is not a “Biologos” concept.

 

[grannymh]

What specifically are you addressing iin Humanii Generis?

Chapters 11 & 12

Sadly, I am discovering that some people do not understand what is being said in these chapters. That is understandable because apparently “church-speak” and very long sentences belong to the dead generation which knew basic Catholicism and could use some common sense in learning the “hard truths.”

Fortunately, the true Catholic Church survived the internal movement to place difficult hard truths under the welcome mat.

I trust your reading judgment. If some of the stuff in chapters 11 and 12 sound like the 1940’s, and subsequently are difficult to interpret in modern times, I will do my best to answer your questions.

 

[grannymh]

What specifically are you addressing in Humanii Generis?

Chapters 11 and 12.

Sadly, I am discovering that some people do not understand what is being said. That is understandable because apparently “church-speak” and very long sentences belong to the dead generation which knew basic Catholicism and could use some common sense in learning the “hard truths.”

Fortunately, come Catholics survived the internal movement to place difficult hard truths under the welcome mat.

I trust your reading judgment. If some of the stuff in chapters 11 and 12 sound like the 1940’s, I would like to help interpret.

 

[cfauster]

I do not like to break that bubble.

But, unfortunately, that good concept is miles away from the real hard truths. One real hard truth is that the Catholic Church is not a “Biologos” concept.

For those unfamiliar, here is a BioLogos link.

grannymh’s caution was echoed this summer in another CAF thread.

 

[simpleas]

Chapters 11 & 12

Sadly, I am discovering that some people do not understand what is being said in these chapters. That is understandable because apparently “church-speak” and very long sentences belong to the dead generation which knew basic Catholicism and could use some common sense in learning the “hard truths.”

Fortunately, the true Catholic Church survived the internal movement to place difficult hard truths under the welcome mat.

I trust your reading judgment. If some of the stuff in chapters 11 and 12 sound like the 1940’s, and subsequently are difficult to interpret in modern times, I will do my best to answer your questions.

This isn’t addressed to me, but I’d like to comment.

I don’t think the chapters 11 and 12 are difficult to interpret, yet I’d have never heard about this from regular church attendance. I have never heard any homilies regarding ‘big tents’ etc, the concern of today is of the family, terrorism, Christian’s being oppressed. Nothing about catholic’s working within the church to change it’s doctrines.

May be it’s the times?

 

[cfauster]

Some serious thinking about the Catholic Big Tent which welcomes all sinners and all nations.

What happens when a Tent resident sincerely believes that Jesus Christ is an itinerant preacher and holds the Jesus Seminar as the bearer of truth?
What happens when another Tent resident sincerely believes that chapter 6, Gospel of John is symbolic as found in a variety of Christian Faiths?
What happens when another Tent resident sincerely believes that the basic meaning of Original Sin is silly and follows the teachings of the Center for Action and Contemplation?

Just to attempt clarification … I have guesses of examples for two of the above three types of “Tent residents” but I’d appreciate an example of the remaining type, and also confirmation or correction of my two guesses.

… a Tent resident sincerely believes that Jesus Christ is an itinerant preacher and holds the Jesus Seminar as the bearer of truth? John Dominic Crossan ?

- If I’m correct, here’s something echoing grannymh’s warning.

… another Tent resident sincerely believes that chapter 6, Gospel of John is symbolic as found in a variety of Christian Faiths? *I have no idea for this one.
*

… another Tent resident sincerely believes that the basic meaning of Original Sin is silly and follows the teachings of the Center for Action and Contemplation? Richard Rohr? Earlier posts in this thread discussed his teaching.

 

[grannymh]

This isn’t addressed to me, but I’d like to comment.

I don’t think the chapters 11 and 12 are difficult to interpret, yet I’d have never heard about this from regular church attendance. I have never heard any homilies regarding ‘big tents’ etc, the concern of today is of the family, terrorism, Christian’s being oppressed. Nothing about catholic’s working within the church to change it’s doctrines.

May be it’s the times?

The internet via e-mail messages etc. and a liberal modern Catholic news outlet is where you hear about the new emerging progressive Catholic Churches. (plural intended) like the Center for Action and Contemplation, the Jesus Seminar, and the Fox Institute for Creation Spirituality.

As for never hearing homilies, a few years back, a thread on this topic was dead in the water. More recent a thread on stealth Arianism was dead in the water. Both hit the trash because only a few CAF members understood what has been happening …

Does anyone think that Satan would publically advertise his plans?

 

[cfauster]

… another Tent resident sincerely believes that chapter 6, Gospel of John is symbolic as found in a variety of Christian Faiths?

Thanks for the suggestion of Matthew Fox. I did find the following:

*One scholar who has created a theology outside the box of conventional Catholic dogma is Rev. Dr. Matthew Fox. In * The Coming of the Cosmic Christ, *Fox created a Christology for the third millennium that grounds Christian mysticism in modern cosmology. Fox says that the Cosmic Christ reveals the “divine ‘I Am’ in every creature … Fox asks,

How are we the bread of life or living bread to each other? . . . The Statements that “I am bread” and “I am wine” ground our reverence for food and drink, wheat and wine, soil and vineyard, the processes of photosynthesis and all that makes things grow in an ultimate reverence. . . . In this revelation of the divinity of the bread and wine lies that part of compassion that is celebration . . . To celebrate our “I am” is to put our being before our doing or having or proving. . . . An “I am consciousness also affects our attitude toward time. The past and future are not what exist; it is the now moment that exists most richly. It is the divine “now” that is ours for the drinking (pp 154-155).
*
The above is at
gaiarising.org/2012/02/21st-century-cosmology-and-the-gospel-of-john-part-iv-bread-of-life/

Here is one dated, gentle critique of Fox.

 

[grannymh]

Just to attempt clarification … I have guesses of examples for two of the above three types of “Tent residents” but I’d appreciate an example of the remaining type, and also confirmation or correction of my two guesses.

… a Tent resident sincerely believes that Jesus Christ is an itinerant preacher and holds the Jesus Seminar as the bearer of truth? John Dominic Crossan ?

- If I’m correct, here’s something echoing grannymh’s warning.

… another Tent resident sincerely believes that chapter 6, Gospel of John is symbolic as found in a variety of Christian Faiths? I have no idea for this one.

… another Tent resident sincerely believes that the basic meaning of Original Sin is silly and follows the teachings of the Center for Action and Contemplation? Richard Rohr? Earlier posts in this thread discussed his teaching.

I recognized the Jesus symbolism in my first adult biography of Jesus Christ. It was in the chapter that praised Jesus for His talented preaching so that people in the crowd shared their little food with their neighbors. For some Tent residents today, a piece of Eucharistic bread is a reminder that we are neighbors.

To this day, I remember my fear for our Catholic Church, when I opened the Sunday Chicago Tribune and read one of the first news stories about John Dominic Crossan.

Reverend Richard Rohr was brought to my attention by some CAF members who like his stuff.

The First Things link would be low on my concern list. I am more interested in the gut dangers.

It looks like not one person could spot the attack on the Catholic Church. (post 514)
This is so sad.
“Yes, and the Catholic Church guided by the Spirit. And the Spirit, of course, guides us in the unfolding of revelation. People who go to another church just because they disagree are not understanding the meaning of communion, of the centrality of Eucharist. The Church is not just an ideology, a bunch of doctrines. The Church is defined by Eucharist, by relationship, as family, correct? People in a family can disagree on opinions or what they think is important.”

 

[grannymh]

Thanks for the suggestion of Matthew Fox. I did find the following:

*One scholar who has created a theology outside the box of conventional Catholic dogma is Rev. Dr. Matthew Fox. In *The Coming of the Cosmic Christ, Fox created a Christology for the third millennium that grounds Christian mysticism in modern cosmology. Fox says that the Cosmic Christ reveals the “divine ‘I Am’ in every creature … Fox asks,
*
How are we the bread of life or living bread to each other? . . . The Statements that “I am bread” and “I am wine” ground our reverence for food and drink, wheat and wine, soil and vineyard, the processes of photosynthesis and all that makes things grow in an ultimate reverence. . . . In this revelation of the divinity of the bread and wine lies that part of compassion that is celebration . . . To celebrate our “I am” is to put our being before our doing or having or proving. . . . An “I am consciousness also affects our attitude toward time. The past and future are not what exist; it is the now moment that exists most richly. It is the divine “now” that is ours for the drinking (pp 154-155).
*
The above is at
gaiarising.org/2012/02/21st-century-cosmology-and-the-gospel-of-john-part-iv-bread-of-life/

Here is one dated, gentle critique of Fox.

I never did read the first books of Matthew Fox because I could not stop laughing at their original titles. However, I did read about some of his lectures on Original Sin when he was still a Catholic professor. At that point, I was not sure of all the Catholic teachings flowing from the first three factual chapters of Sacred Scripture. It breaks my heart to know that many, not all, Catholics, including some clergy, treat those chapters as comic books.

 

[simpleas]

The internet via e-mail messages etc. and a liberal modern Catholic news outlet is where you hear about the new emerging progressive Catholic Churches. (plural intended) like the Center for Action and Contemplation, the Jesus Seminar, and the Fox Institute for Creation Spirituality.

As for never hearing homilies, a few years back, a thread on this topic was dead in the water. More recent a thread on stealth Arianism was dead in the water. Both hit the trash because only a few CAF members understood what has been happening …

Does anyone think that Satan would publically advertise his plans?

I had a look on The Centre for Action and Contemplation website as I don’t recall seeing where it said it was Catholic exclusively, Fr Rohr is Catholic, but here is how CAC is described.

Although the CAC is rooted in its Catholic identity, it is an educational organization, deeply committed to ecumenical and inter-religious dialogue. Friends and participants at the CAC come from all faiths and backgrounds. CAC is committed to bearing witness to the universal awakening within Christian mysticism and the Perennial Tradition.

I haven’t looked up the other two you mention yet.

 

[grannymh]

I had a look on The Centre for Action and Contemplation website as I don’t recall seeing where it said it was Catholic exclusively, Fr Rohr is Catholic, but here is how CAC is described.

Although the CAC is rooted in its Catholic identity, it is an educational organization, deeply committed to ecumenical and inter-religious dialogue. Friends and participants at the CAC come from all faiths and backgrounds. CAC is committed to bearing witness to the universal awakening within Christian mysticism and the Perennial Tradition.

I haven’t looked up the other two you mention yet.

Rooted in its Catholic identity. Someone should take a serious look at the branches it is sprouting.

 

[simpleas]

Rooted in its Catholic identity. Someone should take a serious look at the branches it is sprouting.

I was trying to point out that it doesn’t just teach it’s own form of Catholicism, but is inclusive of many faiths. It isn’t a church either.

I suppose it’s not everyone’s thing, but it may help some people on their way to God, rather than not bothering at all.

 

[OneSheep]

Thank you. And a Happy New Year to you and your family!

Thank you so much for this great link. It is a wonderful New Year gift.

Now, let’s get down to what you wrote in post 514, page 35.

I am looking forward to your response to my comments about this valuable important paragraph from post 514, page 35.

“Yes, and the Catholic Church guided by the Spirit. And the Spirit, of course, guides us in the unfolding of revelation. People who go to another church just because they disagree are not understanding the meaning of communion, of the centrality of Eucharist. The Church is not just an ideology, a bunch of doctrines. The Church is defined by Eucharist, by relationship, as family, correct? People in a family can disagree on opinions or what they think is important.”
Really love that word “us” in this beautiful sentence “And the Spirit, of course, guides us in the unfolding of revelation.” This morning, I looked into the mirror and decided that I am one of the us. Thank you, OneSheep. I feel great about that.

**Therefore, would you kindly tell me your first step to me unfolding revelation. **

I put the above in bold because you, not the author of that link, wrote the information in post 514, page 35. It is you, not anyone else, who presented the information. I am really excited about your proposition that the Spirit guides us – me-- in the unfolding of revelation. I am ready to go as soon as you kindly tell me your first step to get the Spirit involved.

What I see from our last three Popes is a trend toward an anthropology that reflects, “Through the Spirit we see that whatsoever exists in any way is good.”(St. Augustine). It is a trend toward a theology of unconditional love, a move toward seeing not only goodness but beauty and infinite value in people. The walls that divide people are breaking down, the world is becoming a smaller place, intermingling of peoples of many faiths is going somewhere, it is leading to a greater acceptance, a fall of tribalism. Of course, with all trends toward new there will be some resistance from those that find more comfort in the old ways, which is what we are seeing in recent politics.

“Us” is a “mega” term. While certain individuals in the Church (i.e. Rahner) have much more influence than others, no theologian has ever claimed to be an individual source of unfolding revelation.

The world is changing, dear, for the better.

 

[grannymh]

I was trying to point out that it doesn’t just teach it’s own form of Catholicism, but is inclusive of many faiths. It isn’t a church either.

I would debate the observation that the CAC is not a church in the broad sense. It certainly has its own personally picked teachings. While no one agrees with me, it has its own forms of converting people spiritually to itself. Interestingly, one can claim Catholicism while choosing CAC teachings over certain Catholic doctrines.

 

[grannymh]

What I see from our last three Popes is a trend toward an anthropology that reflects, “Through the Spirit we see that whatsoever exists in any way is good.”(St. Augustine). It is a trend toward a theology of unconditional love, a move toward seeing not only goodness but beauty and infinite value in people. The walls that divide people are breaking down, the world is becoming a smaller place, intermingling of peoples of many faiths is going somewhere, it is leading to a greater acceptance, a fall of tribalism. Of course, with all trends toward new there will be some resistance from those that find more comfort in the old ways, which is what we are seeing in recent politics.

“Us” is a “mega” term. While certain individuals in the Church (i.e. Rahner) have much more influence than others, no theologian has ever claimed to be an individual source of unfolding revelation.

The world is changing, dear, for the better.

I appreciate your observations. Thank you.

**Therefore, would you kindly tell me your first step to us unfolding revelation. **

You did speak clearly in post 514. So I am confident that you can speak clearly an answer to my common sense request for your first step…

“Yes, and the Catholic Church guided by the Spirit. And the Spirit, of course, guides us in the unfolding of revelation. People who go to another church just because they disagree are not understanding the meaning of communion, of the centrality of Eucharist. The Church is not just an ideology, a bunch of doctrines. The Church is defined by Eucharist, by relationship, as family, correct? People in a family can disagree on opinions or what they think is important.”