The Meaning of "the Fall"

[Tannhauser_1509]

It’s common in Christianity to hear the world spoken of as “broken” or “fallen,” implying that there once was a hypothetical state of nature wherein the vicissitudes and disappointments which we currently experience did not exist. But from the vantage point of cosmology, biological evolution, and more specifically evolutionary anthropology it seems as if the world and the wider universe can be said to have always been in such a chaotic state. Indeed, how can we expect anything but a human born into original sin ever to have been possible when man himself, even upon the creation of man’s soul through special divine intervention, has evolved into a world plagued by the decay of things? What does it mean that men are “fallen” creatures, given that they have not really fallen from anything? What does it mean to say that creation will be “renewed” or “given a second birth” when, in point of fact, the world of nature acts as it always has? Could it be said that the fall of Adam and Eve was inevitable?

 

[Seagull]

I’ve heard of - fallen out of grace -

or fallen out of favor -

or fallen - out of love.

Or fallen on deaf ears !

"But from the vantage point of cosmology, biological evolution,
and more specifically evolutionary anthropology
it seems as if the world and the wider universe can be said
to have always been in such a chaotic state. "

 

[Benadam]

The fall was ontological. Our state of ‘being’ changed to a state closer to the state of being like all the other animals. .One can think of it as a fall in the sense that God is above us and the rest of the animals are below us. We were more like God and less like the rest of the animals before the fall. We are less like God and more like the rest of the animals after the fall. The change is profound. Imagine a life in a state of immortality. That implies a lot. A life that never ends verses a life that ends when the body is no longer able to be animated. A body that, after the sin, like the other animals, needs to survive. Survival comes with a set of laws the St. Paul called the law of sin and death. Imagine the changes. A body that before did not move involuntarily. No overwhelming urges to reproduce because the body doesn’t die. If no one died there is no past or no history. No infringement of time on the psyche. All these things we experience now are more like animals because now, like them our bodies die.

 

[Vico]

It’s common in Christianity to hear the world spoken of as “broken” or “fallen,” implying that there once was a hypothetical state of nature wherein the vicissitudes and disappointments which we currently experience did not exist. But from the vantage point of cosmology, biological evolution, and more specifically evolutionary anthropology it seems as if the world and the wider universe can be said to have always been in such a chaotic state. Indeed, how can we expect anything but a human born into original sin ever to have been possible when man himself, even upon the creation of man’s soul through special divine intervention, has evolved into a world plagued by the decay of things? What does it mean that men are “fallen” creatures, given that they have not really fallen from anything? What does it mean to say that creation will be “renewed” or “given a second birth” when, in point of fact, the world of nature acts as it always has? Could it be said that the fall of Adam and Eve was inevitable?

Original Justice was lost, but this Justice was not a natural state, but the result of supernatural and preternatural gifts. Because we are conceived without them this is called fallen state. However, Original Justice was not the highest state.

Catechism

374 The first man was not only created good, but was also established in friendship with his Creator and in harmony with himself and with the creation around him, in a state that would be surpassed only by the glory of the new creation in Christ.

376 By the radiance of this grace all dimensions of man’s life were confirmed. As long as he remained in the divine intimacy, man would not have to suffer or die. 252 The inner harmony of the human person, the harmony between man and woman, 253 and finally the harmony between the first couple and all creation, comprised the state called “original justice”.

379 This entire harmony of original justice, foreseen for man in God’s plan, will be lost by the sin of our first parents.

1023 Those who die in God’s grace and friendship and are perfectly purified live for ever with Christ. They are like God for ever, for they “see him as he is,” face to face: …

1042 At the end of time, the Kingdom of God will come in its fullness. After the universal judgment, the righteous will reign for ever with Christ, glorified in body and soul. …

1045 For man, this consummation will be the final realization of the unity of the human race, which God willed from creation and of which the pilgrim Church has been “in the nature of sacrament.” …

 

[Tannhauser_1509]

Original Justice was lost, but this Justice was not a natural state, but the result of supernatural and preternatural gifts.

This teaching of the Church is certainly consonant with how I’ve come to conceptualize original sin, as essentially a state of unwrought potential: man seeks to attain to a higher ontological stratum by virtue of his intellective capacities, but is continually held at the threshold of this attainment by the dissonant realities of the physical world and his state as an animal. It is through no natural power that this state can be superseded; only by the providence of divine grace.

I still fail to understand what this Eden of “original justice” would have looked like from an anthropological point of view. The real problem for man, as far as I can tell, is precisely the dissonance between his transcendent aims and the physical reality in which he is mired (and not just physical reality around him, but within his own biological mechanics). So long as the latter persists, how can the former be fully accomplished? Is it the teaching of the Church that the original state of man was one wherein he would not die physical death? If so, is this not at odds with what we observe as basic rules of biology?

Original Justice was not the highest state.

What do you mean by this? Do you mean to say that original justice was not the highest state for man, or for the created order in general? If the latter, then I understand. If the former, then I am confused. And as for the Catechism #376—where it says, “The inner harmony of the human person, the harmony between man and woman, and finally the harmony between the first couple and all creation, comprised the state called ‘original justice’”—the first two items make sense to me, but the third, the italicized portion, does not. How can man and woman have lived in “harmony” with the rest of creation if all other creatures at that point were not sharing in the same infusion of divine grace (i.e., in the manner it is assumed they will in the renewal of creation brought on by the work of Christ)? Is a relative harmony meant here, as opposed to an absolute harmony?

 

[adgloriam]

I just can’t get enough of your posts @Vico. I hope one day I’ll be able to understand how one follows such a correct path in terms of knowledge and study.

 

[Vico]

If so, is this not at odds with what we observe as basic rules of biology?
…
Do you mean to say that original justice was not the highest state for man, or for the created order in general?

Since the fall occurred, the immortality was not realized.

Original justice was not the highest state for mankind because the constituted state was not stable – it is surpassed by the state from which one cannot fall.

 

[Tannhauser_1509]

Since the fall occurred, the immortality was not realized.

I understand this, but still, the principle of immortality rested in man in this state of “original justice” before his fall. This is what I’m referring to.

 

[Vico]

…
I understand this, but still, the principle of immortality rested in man in this state of “original justice” before his fall. This is what I’m referring to.

The state of original justice was not based on natural biology but upon supernatural and preternatural gifts.

 

[Tannhauser_1509]

The state of original justice was not based on natural biology but upon supernatural and preternatural gifts.

So, in summary, you mean to say that prior to the Fall man, when his body had properly evolved, was elevated by “supernatural and preternatural gifts” to a state of physical immortality, the loss of which came upon the Fall, however that sin manifested itself, and the consequences of which Fall are an inherited physical mortality and state of original sin, the reversal of which can only be achieved by another outpouring of divine grace?

 

[Vico]

… an inherited physical mortality and state of original sin
… by another outpouring of divine grace

The lost preternatural gifts, which were not passed on, were: infused knowledge, absence of concupiscence, and bodily immortality.

Yes, our salvation is through divine grace, including the glorification of the resurrected body for those in heaven. “It is sown in weakness, it shall rise in power” (1 Corinthians 15:43).

 

[edwest211]

“when his body had properly evolved”? Where does that come from? Man was created as a physical being with gifts given to him by a supernatural being. Man is not just a body but a unity of body and soul. These two things are inseparable. “Original Sin is washed away by Baptism but our desire to sin, called concupiscence is understood as an effect of original sin that remains after baptism. The waters of baptism cleanse us of original sin itself, but concupiscence remains as a lingering effect. The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that “certain temporal consequences of sin remain in the baptized, such as suffering, illness, death … as well as an inclination to sin that Tradition calls concupiscence” (No. 1264, emphasis in original).”

So, a strictly scientific view cannot include necessary information. We all sin. No one is perfect but we are called to be holy. Being more like Christ is the way to ‘get better.’ To help us avoid sin.

 

[Tannhauser_1509]

The lost preternatural gifts, which were not passed on, were: infused knowledge, absence of concupiscence, and bodily immortality.

Yes, our salvation is through divine grace, including the glorification of the resurrected body for those in heaven. “It is sown in weakness, it shall rise in power” (1 Corinthians 15:43).

Thank you. You’ve been most helpful.

 

[Tannhauser_1509]

“when his body had properly evolved”? Where does that come from? Man was created as a physical being with gifts given to him by a supernatural being. Man is not just a body but a unity of body and soul. These two things are inseparable.

I don’t disagree with you. I’m a hylemorphist who believes in the special creation of the human soul. But as far as I’m aware, the Church permits one’s subscribing to the idea that the body of modern Homo sapiens evolved from common ancestors with other primates. This is why I stated carefully that I was referring to man’s body.

 

[Gorgias]

Is it the teaching of the Church that the original state of man was one wherein he would not die physical death?

Not exactly. The teaching is that physical immortality isn’t part of human nature, per se, but it was a gift granted to our first human parents. In fact, they lost this gift through sin.

If so, is this not at odds with what we observe as basic rules of biology?

Two thoughts:

• No, because the Church doesn’t claim that physical immortality is intrinsic to our human nature.
• I’m not even sure that you can make the claim that you’re making. After all, you’re only observing present conditions (that is, conditions within the realm of recorded history). That would be like going to an MLB game in the American League and concluding that the Designated Hitter rule has always been in existence…

 

[Tannhauser_1509]

Not exactly. The teaching is that physical immortality isn’t part of human nature, per se, but it was a gift granted to our first human parents. In fact, they lost this gift through sin.

Thank you.