Romans 5:12-21 and Infused Righteousness

[Koineman]

Something I’ve thought of that supports the Catholic view of justification by infused righteousness (as opposed to imputed righteousness) is the text of Romans 5:12-21. If Adam was not merely declared a sinner legally but was also made a sinner, and all his posterity (those in Adam) were also made sinful and not just declared so, why, then, shouldn’t those who believe in Christ also be made righteous, not merely declared righteous? When Paul compares Adam and Christ in Romans 5, he points out that what Christ achieved for us is so much better than the evil that Adam brought upon us. So it seems to do injustice to that text to think that Adam’s sin infused sinfulness into us, but Christ’s act of obedience does not infuse righteousness into us. Thoughts?

 

[JRKH]

An interesting perspective…Very - - -

I’m not Scripturally knowledgeable enough on this to comment further but I’ll…:compcoff:…eagerly other comments.

Peace
James

 

[R_C]

So it seems to do injustice to that text to think that Adam’s sin infused sinfulness into us, but Christ’s act of obedience does not infuse righteousness into us. Thoughts?

I think it’s a matter of freedom.

We know by sententia certa that Adam received sanctifying grace not merely for himself, but for all his posterity, by sententia communis that Original Sin consists in the deprivation of grace caused by the free act of sin committed by the head of the race, and de fide that (a) in the state of original sin man is deprived of sanctifying grace and (b) Adam’s sin is transmitted to his posterity, not by imitation, but by descent.

So we are not “infused sinfulness”, quite the contrary. In a way we receive sanctifying (habitual) grace (the one we can loose in mortal sin) from Adam, but since in the “original sin” he lost it, then by generation we are all born without the sanctifying grace - which we receive with Baptism.

This is just like a man committing a mortal sin and losing sanctifying grace. Through another temporary gift of the Holy Spirit which we call “actual” or “auxiliary” grace, the man is moved to repentance and to the Sacrament of Reconciliation, where he may be absolved and receive the sanctifying grace once more.

On the other hand, what Christ did was not like Adam’s fall, it was something literally divine: He took upon Himself the whole burden of sin, from Adam until the last day when He comes back in glory. From that day we received the gift of the Holy Spirit - who was not with us before - and we can be baptized (removing the original sin) and forgiven (removing mortal sins).

But it is up to us to choose the light over the darkness…Christ cannot impose that choice upon us. He did all He could do: He took all our burdens on Him, so that we are truly free to repent and be forgiven through Christ Himself.

Negative things (ex. sinfulness, evil) are nothing as of themselves: rather, they are the absence of something (ex. sanctifying grace). That is why we know that even the demons are angels that were endowed with sanctifying grace and it is because of their (permanent) choice that they behave in an evil fashion…they are not intrinsically evil.

 

[fhansen]

Something I’ve thought of that supports the Catholic view of justification by infused righteousness (as opposed to imputed righteousness) is the text of Romans 5:12-21. If Adam was not merely declared a sinner legally but was also made a sinner, and all his posterity (those in Adam) were also made sinful and not just declared so, why, then, shouldn’t those who believe in Christ also be made righteous, not merely declared righteous? When Paul compares Adam and Christ in Romans 5, he points out that what Christ achieved for us is so much better than the evil that Adam brought upon us. So it seems to do injustice to that text to think that Adam’s sin infused sinfulness into us, but Christ’s act of obedience does not infuse righteousness into us. Thoughts?

I think this makes sense; there was an ontological change in humankind due to Adam’s sin, which would likewise seem to necessitate a real change in order to reverse that first one. In any case God is after real change in us, not merely imputed change; this is what the New Covenant is all about as I understand it.

 

[Pax]

I think this makes sense; there was an ontological change in humankind due to Adam’s sin, which would likewise seem to necessitate a real change in order to reverse that first one. In any case God is after real change in us, not merely imputed change; this is what the New Covenant is all about as I understand it.

You’ve made the right call here. There is an ontological change at justification. A careful look at the scriptures brings this home in spades.

Romans 5:19 says:

For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man’s obedience many will be made righteous.

The phrase “made righteous”(“katestathesan” in Greek) is clearly ontological just as the fall is ontological.

Another of many passages that supports this is:

Galatians 3:21 which says:

Is the Law then contrary to the promises of God? May it never be! For if a law had been given which was able to impart life, then righteousness would indeed have been based on law.

The Greek word translated here as “impart life” is zoopoeio, which means to cause to live or make alive. Note that in Galatians 3:21, Paul states that if a law could give life, then righteousness would truly have been by law. Paul is equating the giving of life with righteousness. That means that righteousness or justification is the giving of spiritual life.

There are many other passages that indicate the same thing.

God bless.

 

[fhansen]

You’ve made the right call here. There is an ontological change at justification. A careful look at the scriptures brings this home in spades.

Romans 5:19 says:

For as by one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, so by one man’s obedience many will be made righteous.

The phrase “made righteous”(“katestathesan” in Greek) is clearly ontological just as the fall is ontological.

Another of many passages that supports this is:

Galatians 3:21 which says:

Is the Law then contrary to the promises of God? May it never be! For if a law had been given which was able to impart life, then righteousness would indeed have been based on law.

The Greek word translated here as “impart life” is zoopoeio, which means to cause to live or make alive. Note that in Galatians 3:21, Paul states that if a law could give life, then righteousness would truly have been by law. Paul is equating the giving of life with righteousness. That means that righteousness or justification is the giving of spiritual life.

There are many other passages that indicate the same thing.

God bless.

That’s interesting. In the NC, God promises to be our God again, placing His laws on our hearts and writing them in our minds, a work of His hands, a work of grace. In Phil 3 Paul tells us that he was perfect in righteousness as a Pharisee and yet his “gains” were all garbage. “I consider them garbage, that I may gain Christ 9 and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ—the righteousness that comes from God on the basis of faith.” By trying to gain righteousness by obedience to the law, man’s “righteousness” is self-based because it could only be achieved by his own efforts, not by grace, which is only obtainable by placing ones faith-involving* trust*-in God, something Adam obviously rejected. Now grace is available to accomplish what man couldn’t on his own-true righteousness, i.e. the “righteousness of God”, based on faith not on the law.

It’s also interesting that grace, love, righteousness, holiness, the Holy Spirit are all linked/related in one place or another in Catholic theology. And yet man’s cooperation is required; he can always resist this grace, this righteousness-turning away from God again and losing the grace infused at Baptism. And righteousness (justice) can be increased according to Trent, which is exactly what God expects us to do as per the Parable of the Talents , for example.

In any case God is after authentic righteousness in man. He gives it, but then He draws us to sustain and even increase it.