Understanding the doctrine of original sin

[thunderbolt94]

Hello,

I’m having trouble trying to understand the doctrine of original, especially the Catholic position.

I was looking at this BBC article regarding the doctrine of original sin and this is what it stated:

Augustine developed the following argument:

“Nothing remains but to conclude that in the first man all are understood to have sinned, because all were in him when he sinned; whereby sin is brought in with birth and not removed save by the new birth… it is manifest that in Adam all sinned, so to speak, en masse. By that sin we became a corrupt mass”
Augustine

And also:

"The whole essence of human nature was contained in Adam, the first man
when Adam disobeyed God, the whole of human nature disobeyed God
thus the whole of human nature became sinful
thus the whole human race was damaged for all time.
Nothing remains but to conclude that in the first man all are understood to have sinned, because all were in him when he sinned; whereby sin is brought in with birth and not removed save by the new birth… it is manifest that in Adam all sinned, so to speak, en masse. By that sin we became a corrupt mass.
Augustine
Bible scholars think that this element of Augustine’s theory was partly based on a mistranslation in the Latin version of the Bible. However, Augustine does not base his entire argument only on that particular text, and his theory is not wrecked by this error.

Having established that every human being had inherited guilt from Adam, Augustine taught that this was why that all human beings were damned, even if they didn’t commit any extra sins of their own."

So did inherit the guilt of original sin, or the consequences of original sin? I would like strong clarification on this doctrine.

God Bless,

 

[Jim_Roberts]

Hello,

I’m having trouble trying to understand the doctrine of original, especially the Catholic position.

I was looking at this BBC article regarding the doctrine of original sin and this is what it stated:

Augustine developed the following argument:

“Nothing remains but to conclude that in the first man all are understood to have sinned, because all were in him when he sinned; whereby sin is brought in with birth and not removed save by the new birth… it is manifest that in Adam all sinned, so to speak, en masse. By that sin we became a corrupt mass”
Augustine

---

WE STILLL BELIEVE IN ORIGINAL SIN, BUT AN EXAMPLE] THE BABY IS IN NO WAY BEING CONDEMED FOR SOMETHIG IT DIDN’T DO, THE CHURCH HAS NEVER TAUGHT THAT UNBAPTISED CHILDREN, OR ADULTS WILL LOSE THEIR SOUL,OR EVEN BE THROUGH NO FAULT OF T HEIR OWN DEPRIVED OF THE PRESENCE OF GOD IN ETERNITY. WE KNOW THAT JESUS COMMANDS BAPTISM FOR HIS FOLLOWERS AND THAT THIS IS THE NORMAL WAY FOR ENTRY INTO THE KINGDOM. IN OTHER WORDS, THE CHURCH IS MAKING EVERY EFFORT TO LEAD US TTOO A RICHER AND FURTHER UNDERSTANDING OF THE CHURCH AS THE FAMILY OF CHRIST, AND HOW ALL OF HER ACTIVITIES, MOST ESPECIALLY THE SACRAMENTS, MUST REFLECT THAT VISION.

JESUS I TRUST IN YOU

And also:

"The whole essence of human nature was contained in Adam, the first man
when Adam disobeyed God, the whole of human nature disobeyed God
thus the whole of human nature became sinful
thus the whole human race was damaged for all time.
Nothing remains but to conclude that in the first man all are understood to have sinned, because all were in him when he sinned; whereby sin is brought in with birth and not removed save by the new birth… it is manifest that in Adam all sinned, so to speak, en masse. By that sin we became a corrupt mass.
Augustine
Bible scholars think that this element of Augustine’s theory was partly based on a mistranslation in the Latin version of the Bible. However, Augustine does not base his entire argument only on that particular text, and his theory is not wrecked by this error.

Having established that every human being had inherited guilt from Adam, Augustine taught that this was why that all human beings were damned, even if they didn’t commit any extra sins of their own."

So did inherit the guilt of original sin, or the consequences of original sin? I would like strong clarification on this doctrine.

God Bless,

 

[Quis_ut_Deus_3]

Hello,

So did inherit the guilt of original sin, or the consequences of original sin? I would like strong clarification on this doctrine.

God Bless,

May the grace and peace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you.

The following is taken straight from the Cathechism of the Catholic Church:

389 The doctrine of original sin is, so to speak, the “reverse side” of the Good News that Jesus is the Saviour of all men, that all need salvation and that salvation is offered to all through Christ. The Church, which has the mind of Christ, 263 knows very well that we cannot tamper with the revelation of original sin without undermining the mystery of Christ.

404 How did the sin of Adam become the sin of all his descendants? The whole human race is in Adam “as one body of one man”. 293 By this “unity of the human race” all men are implicated in Adam’s sin, as all are implicated in Christ’s justice. Still, the transmission of original sin is a mystery that we cannot fully understand. But we do know by Revelation that Adam had received original holiness and justice not for himself alone, but for all human nature. By yielding to the tempter, Adam and Eve committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state. 294 It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice. And that is why original sin is called “sin” only in an analogical sense: it is a sin “contracted” and not “committed” - a state and not an act.

405 Although it is proper to each individual, 295 original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called concupiscence". Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.

406 The Church’s teaching on the transmission of original sin was articulated more precisely in the fifth century, especially under the impulse of St. Augustine’s reflections against Pelagianism, and in the sixteenth century, in opposition to the Protestant Reformation. Pelagius held that man could, by the natural power of free will and without the necessary help of God’s grace, lead a morally good life; he thus reduced the influence of Adam’s fault to bad example. The first Protestant reformers, on the contrary, taught that original sin has radically perverted man and destroyed his freedom; they identified the sin inherited by each man with the tendency to evil (concupiscentia), which would be insurmountable. The Church pronounced on the meaning of the data of Revelation on original sin especially at the second Council of Orange (529) 296 and at the Council of Trent (1546). 297

407 The doctrine of original sin, closely connected with that of redemption by Christ, provides lucid discernment of man’s situation and activity in the world. By our first parents’ sin, the devil has acquired a certain domination over man, even though man remains free. Original sin entails “captivity under the power of him who thenceforth had the power of death, that is, the devil”. 298 Ignorance of the fact that man has a wounded nature inclined to evil gives rise to serious errors in the areas of education, politics, social action 299 and morals.

417 Adam and Eve transmitted to their descendants human nature wounded by their own first sin and hence deprived of original holiness and justice; this deprivation is called “original sin”.

418 As a result of original sin, human nature is weakened in its powers, subject to ignorance, suffering and the domination of death, and inclined to sin (this inclination is called “concupiscence”).

Hope this helps.

God bless you,
Quis ut Deus 3

 

[mardukm]

Dear brother Thunderbolt,

So did inherit the guilt of original sin, or the consequences of original sin? I would like strong clarification on this doctrine.

CCC 417 and 418 that was already quoted are pretty clear it is the consequences that are inherited, not the guilt.

CCC 405 also clearly explains “original sin does not have the character of a personal fault.”

The term “guilt” in English normally denotes fault or blame. As CCC 405 explains, that is not the meaning of the term “guilt” in the phrase “guilt of original sin.” So that we inherit original sin does not mean we inherit the blame or fault for Adam’s original sin.

The actual Latin word for “fault” or “blame” is culpa. But the actual, original Latin word for “guilt” used in the phrase translated into English as “guilt of original sin” is not culpa, but reatus. Culpa is the blame or fault attached to a particular bad act, while reatus is more akin to the moral/legal consequences that are naturally attached to that bad act.

I hope that helps.

Blessings,
Marduk