Romans 3:23 and the Avoiding Sin

[CurlySmirly]

I always understood Romans 3 to be talking about original sin, meaning that while no one can claim that they are “perfect” and must depend on the grace of God for their righteousness, it is still plausible for people to live without personal sin. Of course, this is assuming that the person relies heavily on the graces of God, for nothing can be done without God’s grace, and that it is still a hard endeavor.
In a book about the immaculate conception, however, it states that Paul was talking about personal sin, because the sinful things he describes are actions, not an inheritable concupiscence. Thus, one cannot use the verse as a defense of the inherited sinfulness of Mary.
If this is the case, then what does Paul mean by “all?” Our Lord, for example, was tempted in every way as he had a fully human nature yet did not sin. What does this mean for the Saints who were recorded to have lived sinless lives by being so immersed in God’s grace? I always saw the possibility of abstaining from personal sin as a direct result of free will and throwing oneself at the graces of God, through which all things are possible.
Am I getting something wrong here?

 

[fhansen]

Baptized folk are free from OS, but still fight a battle, of the will, with concupiscence, with whether or not lesser created, things are more important to them than God, to put it one way. And anytime we opt for those things first we are still acting in a disordered manner. Anyway, the Council of Trent has these teachings to offer. You have to read them carefully but the overall sense is that it’s entirely possible to obey the commandments with the help of grace, presumably avoiding mortal sin while venial sins may not be possible to overcome completely in this life :

Canon 18.
If anyone says that the commandments of God are, even for one that is justified and constituted in grace,[121] impossible to observe, let him be anathema.

Canon 22.
If anyone says that the one justified either can without the special help of God persevere in the justice received,[123] or that with that help he cannot, let him be anathema.

Canon 23.
If anyone says that a man once justified can sin no more, nor lose grace,[124] and that therefore he that falls and sins was never truly justified; or on the contrary, that he can during his whole life avoid all sins, even those that are venial, except by a special privilege from God, as the Church holds in regard to the Blessed Virgin, let him be anathema.

 

[Hodos]

I always understood Romans 3 to be talking about original sin, meaning that while no one can claim that they are “perfect” and must depend on the grace of God for their righteousness, it is still plausible for people to live without personal sin. Of course, this is assuming that the person relies heavily on the graces of God, for nothing can be done without God’s grace, and that it is still a hard endeavor.

I don’t see a lot of evidence for this interpretation. When I read Chapters 1-3 leading up to vs. 23, Paul is calling out both Jew and Gentile not just for original sin, but for personal sin, and condemns all as lawbreakers.

If this is the case, then what does Paul mean by “all?”

Paul excludes Jesus explicitly from this use of all. First in vs. 4, Paul says let God be found true, though every man be a liar. As you know, Jesus is God in the flesh. This is further worked out in Chapter 5, a bit more explicitly, when Paul shows Jesus as the righteous one who dies for all and brings life to all.

And just to further clarify, in 2 Corinthians 5:20, also written by Paul, he states: He made Him (Jesus) who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf (meaning to stand in our stead under the curse of the law), so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.

 

[fhansen]

I always understood Romans 3 to be talking about original sin, meaning that while no one can claim that they are “perfect” and must depend on the grace of God for their righteousness, it is still plausible for people to live without personal sin.

We have to understand that, under the New Covenant, righteousness is not merely imputed but rather granted/infused, such that grace directly causes our righteousness, our justification, in response to faith which itself is a gift of grace, a gift we can act on or reject. Faith is meant to produce righteousness IOW, not serve as a replacement for it. Then we are no longer worthless, no longer unrighteous-as long as we remain in Him and He in us. The Law, while holy, spiritual, and good (Rom 7), cannot justify us, and yet we’ll still be judged by the Law (Rom 2), because it truly reflects the “righteousness of God” which we obtain “on the basis of faith” (Phil 3:9-10). The difference is that only God can make us just (Jer 31:33). “Apart from Me you can do nothing.” (John 15:5). Faith is the doorway to communion with God.

 

[Vico]

Romans 3:12 “All have taken the wrong course” now Saint Paul is speaking generally of Jews and Gentiles together. See Romans 3

9 What then? Do we excel them? No, not so. For we have charged both Jews, and Greeks, that they are all under sin.