Luther vs. the Catholic Church: Original Sin

[Pathway2]

I am back.

I wanted to ask Questions again.

like:

"what is the nature of Original Sin? Luther had this idea of Moral Depravity where Human beings cannot do anything good; the church opposed this idea However. What is the Catholic view of the consequences of Original sin then?

 

[Richca]

The idea of total depravity from Martin Luther in regard to original sin is synonymous with the protestant idea of sola gratia, i.e., by grace alone. Luther thought that the will of man was so corrupted from original sin that it does nothing in the way of salvation in such wise that under the influence of the grace of justification or conversion from the state of sin to the state of grace or sanctifying grace man’s will is merely a passive entity in such wise that it does not on its own in some manner freely cooperate and assent to said grace and could refuse its consent and reject it. Essentially, the grace of justification from the protestant’s view is irresistable and thus one of their four or five solas, sola gratia.

I believe the protestants believe that people in the state of sin can perform some natural good works like build buildings and plant vineyards and such like but whether or not they believe as well that such natural good works are still sins or not I’m not to sure, though I think they may. The Catholic Church believes that man’s will was wounded by original sin but not extinguished and that under the influence of supernatural grace man freely cooperates with God’s grace and assents to it and that he can reject God’s initiative. In other words, God’s grace and initiative doesn’t deprive humans of their real freedom of will which original sin did not completely extinguish.

 

[Pathway2]

This is not meant to be rude to you, but is there any idea of it in scripture or Tradition of the idea that Original sin has distinguished man’s free will?

 

[Hodos]

To help guide your conversation, I am posting the article on original sin from the Augsburg Confession. Hope this helps define what Lutherans believe about Original Sin.

Article II, CA: “Also they teach that since the fall of Adam all men begotten in the natural way are born with sin, that is, without the fear of God, without trust in God, and with concupiscence; and that this disease or vice of origin, is truly sin, even now condemning and bringing eternal death upon those not born again through Baptism and the Holy Ghost. They condemn the Pelagians and others who deny that original depravity is sin, and who, to obscure the glory of Christ’s merit and benefits, argue that man can be justified before God by his own strength and reason.”

 

[Gorgias]

This is not meant to be rude to you, but is there any idea of it in scripture or Tradition of the idea that Original sin has distinguished man’s free will?

Do you mean “extinguished” rather than “distinguished”?

Augustine asserted that humanity was a ‘massa damnata’ and that salvation only came to a select few through God’s (arbitrary) will. This idea runs counter to the teachings of the Church. (In fact, it’s a good demonstration that being a saint or even a doctor of the Church doesn’t mean that every word out one’s mouth is doctrinally sound!)

You can find a discussion of Augustine’s erroneous assertion here.

 

[fhansen]

The Church teaches that the chief aspect of the state of Original Sin is separation from God. Man was made for communion with God. “Apart from Me you can do nothing.” John 15:5.

Without intimate relationship with and willing subjugation to God man is lost, spirutually dead, much less than who he was created to be. But the image of God is still there, not extinct. God appeals to that need, He calls and draws us to Himself, without force, just as He didn’t force Adam to obey. He wants us to learn here on this Earth, with the help of grace, to believe and then love, having also tasted of their opposites, of evil.

So man cannot possibly be saved without grace, without God, but he can still refuse to be saved, or turn back away from God at any step along the way. Grace is resistible.

 

[Sophie111]

There is a fundamental difference with Protestants over the meaning and significance of “concupiscence”.
Prots see this as a sign of mans inherently sinful state. Catholics do not. It is not sin but the “tinder” (straw) thereof leading to possible personal sin.

 

[Hodos]

I would agree with you that this is the fundamental difference between confessional Protestants and Catholics. I would however differ from what you wrote that man is inherently sinful, and substitute the word “inherently” with “hopelessly corrupted.”. Sin was not inherent in the creation of man, but since the fall we are all corrupted and hopelessly in bondage to sin. As a result, we are spiritually dead and cannot of our own means be made righteous. This is why we need a savior. It is only through God’s grace that we are saved. Thank you for drawing that distinction fairly accurately.

 

[Sophie111]

Yes I meant after the fall concupiscence is inherent.

 

[Hodos]

Right, the Protestant distinction is that concupiscence is sin that will be redeemed by Christ as well.

 

[guanophore]

Luther had this idea of Moral Depravity where Human beings cannot do anything good; the church opposed this idea However.

Actually Luther’s view turned out to be more Catholic than it appeared at first, and certainly much more so than the Calvanist perspective. The Joint Declaration clears up a number of historical misunderstandings with regard to justification, which relates back to the state of man after the Fall.

 

[guanophore]

I would agree with you that this is the fundamental difference between confessional Protestants and Catholics. I would however differ from what you wrote that man is inherently sinful, and substitute the word “inherently” with “hopelessly corrupted.”. Sin was not inherent in the creation of man, but since the fall we are all corrupted and hopelessly in bondage to sin. As a result, we are spiritually dead and cannot of our own means be made righteous. This is why we need a savior. It is only through God’s grace that we are saved. Thank you for drawing that distinction fairly accurately.

This is essential the Catholic position outlined in the JDDC.

The only difference might be that the Apostles taught that humans continue to seek after God, because we have an inherent (created) desire to do so, but that we are unable to effect connection with God apart from His grace.