Original Sin/Adam and Eve/Heresy Again

[SpiritMeadow]

You are quite wrong is supposing me a Jesuit. That you would leap to this conclusion based on just two letters in a screen name does not seem to me to be very critical thinking. I have updated my sig in hopes of making it plainer for people to guess correctly its origins. The space we are allotted just doesn’t allow me to put in a better explanation. You must not be a fan of John Henry Newman, or you would easily know the allusion. I am not surprised, as you also missed the import and allusion of those difficult words too. I used them with precision I hope, as being for my purposes, the mot juste!

I must confess though, that aside from my certainty that I have been thoroughly excoriated, your post seemed most incoherent.

So very glad to hear that you are not in the clergy, nor religious. I would be indeed heart sore to learn that someone who had taken on that office was indeed so rude and arrogant. Your continued ad hominem remarks are simply sad. I wish you could have inculcated but a tad of Newman’s humility along with his fine scholarship.

 

[Pete_Holter]

Pope Pius XI wrote that “Original sin is the hereditary but impersonal fault of Adam’s descendants.”

Even that word choice - fault – might lead you to believe that original sin is something that renders us guilty. But it isn’t. Think of fault here in the sense of the San Andreas Fault, the fracture in the earth’s crust that renders California vulnerable to devastating earthquakes. It isn’t my fault, but it’s like a fault line that runs my soul and inclines me to be separate from God.
“Lord, Have Mercy” The Healing Power of Confession by Scott Hahn, Doubleday, April 2003, pg. 72-75

I wonder how Scott Hahn understands what he says here, about us not being rendered guilty, in light of what Trent says here:

“If any one denies, that, by the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is conferred in baptism, the guilt of original sin is remitted …] let him be anathema.”

One of Scott Hahn’s research assistants, Danny Garland, graciously took the time to answer my question. His response follows…

I don’t think that [Scott Hahn] is denying the guilt of Original Sin which is washed away in Baptism. Rather what he is getting at in the quote is that the guilt is not a personal one that we incurred upon ourselves. Instead it is an impersonal guilt inherited from the personal guilt of Adam. I hope that helps to clarify.

Thank you Danny!

 

[Hesychios]

One of Scott Hahn’s research assistants, Danny Garland, graciously took the time to answer my question. His response follows…

I don’t think that [Scott Hahn] is denying the guilt of Original Sin which is washed away in Baptism. Rather what he is getting at in the quote is that the guilt is not a personal one that we incurred upon ourselves. Instead it is an impersonal guilt inherited from the personal guilt of Adam. I hope that helps to clarify.Thank you Danny!

I don’t really think it clarifies.

Impersonal Guilt…it sounds to me self-contradictory…inconceivable.