What is really meant by original sin?

[Future_Prodigy]

I find it hard to see the world as fallen, damaged and or corrupted by some force called original sin. I tend to at times share the belief that all creation isnt born into sin but it is certain socities that are that are sinful, so if we are born into them then technically we are born into sin. Man was born with goodness, truth and the highest potential ofr human evolution but if your born into a racist country that has unequal distribution of wealth, etc then you are born into sin. It is our socio-economic situations that cause these ‘sins’ not some primordial fall of disobeying God that has forever cursed humanity, and every innocent sentient being thereafter. This seems to be a low view of creation.

Can someone please explain the meaning of original sin.

 

[Chesster]

The whole idea of redemption presupposes the idea of original unity with God followed by a subsequent fall. Thus we see in Genesis the result of sin as being a separation from God, “your iniquities have made a separation between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from you” Is 59:2. Before Adam sinned he was in union with God but after he ate the fruit notice that God says to Adam, “where are you?” This is a figurative way of saying that Adam no longer had that life-giving union with God; he was now separated from God or “lost”. However this separation from God didn’t just affect Adam it affected all humanity and we see this expression of humanity being “lost” when Jesus says in Luke 19:10, “For the Son of man came to seek and to save the lost.”

So original sin is a way of saying that humanity is deprived of that life giving union it once had through Adam.

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

I’d like to give my thoughts…

Adam and Eve were perfect, without sin. Consequently, they had sanctifying grace, or everlasting life.

But they sinned. And so they lost that sanctifying grace. And because they lost it, they could not pass it onto their children. Consequently, we (their children) don’t have sanctifying grace because of that original sin.

So, I guess the term “born with original sin” could be better understood if it were “born without sanctifying grace”.

:twocents: Just my thoughts…

 

[grandfather]

I find it hard to see the world as fallen, damaged and or corrupted by some force called original sin. I tend to at times share the belief that all creation isnt born into sin but it is certain socities that are that are sinful, so if we are born into them then technically we are born into sin. Man was born with goodness, truth and the highest potential ofr human evolution but if your born into a racist country that has unequal distribution of wealth, etc then you are born into sin. It is our socio-economic situations that cause these ‘sins’ not some primordial fall of disobeying God that has forever cursed humanity, and every innocent sentient being thereafter. This seems to be a low view of creation.

Can someone please explain the meaning of original sin.

When we look around us and see there is a lot of evil in the world we wonder where it came from. When we look into our souls with the light of conscience and see evil we wonder how it got there. We all share fallen nature. A child does not need to be taught to lie. People need to be taught how to be chaste, not lustful, etc. We must find grace in order to be able to live holy lives. Without it we are depraved. The grace that makes people holy comes from God. It enters the person, meaning it was not theirs by nature.

 

[ABostonCatholic]

I find it hard to see the world as fallen, damaged and or corrupted by some force called original sin. I tend to at times share the belief that all creation isnt born into sin but it is certain socities that are that are sinful, so if we are born into them then technically we are born into sin. Man was born with goodness, truth and the highest potential ofr human evolution but if your born into a racist country that has unequal distribution of wealth, etc then you are born into sin. It is our socio-economic situations that cause these ‘sins’ not some primordial fall of disobeying God that has forever cursed humanity, and every innocent sentient being thereafter. This seems to be a low view of creation.

Can someone please explain the meaning of original sin.

Remember what St. Augustine said in his Confessions about babies…when they are mad and hit their mothers, the only differences between the baby and us is that we hit harder and should know better. That is why our actions are “puerile” or “childish.”

 

[Tomster]

I find it hard to see the world as fallen, damaged and or corrupted by some force called original sin. I tend to at times share the belief that all creation isnt born into sin but it is certain socities that are that are sinful, so if we are born into them then technically we are born into sin. Man was born with goodness, truth and the highest potential ofr human evolution but if your born into a racist country that has unequal distribution of wealth, etc then you are born into sin. It is our socio-economic situations that cause these ‘sins’ not some primordial fall of disobeying God that has forever cursed humanity, and every innocent sentient being thereafter. This seems to be a low view of creation.

Can someone please explain the meaning of original sin.

According to St. Thomas Aquinas, all the descendants of Adam may be considered as so many limbs of one body. Just as the action of some members of the body, say the hand, shares in the decision of the will to do something good or evil, with the result that this action becomes either a good deed or a sin, so all the members of the human race share in the sin of Adam. This is because he moves them by the act of generation (good in itself because ordained by God) much as the will moves the members of the body. According to St. Augustine, Adam is, as it were, the root out of which mankind springs forth. If the root be corrupted, corruption affects the entire plant. It must be remembered, also, that it is not a sinful deed but the state of sin that is transmitted.

Our nature is no longer what it was when it first came from the hands of the Creator. Although not essentially corrupted, it was damaged, and has ever since been rebelling against supernature. Though dark the picture is not hopeless. Original sin is the dark background upon which God painted the bright picture of the Redemption. Rising above all the terrors of original sin is the victorious conviction: We have a Redeemer. St. Paul experienced within himself the results of original sin but he knew nonetheless who could redeem him: “But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind . . . Unhappy man that I am. Who will deliver me from the body of this death? The grace of God through Jesus Christ, our Lord.” Romans 7:23-25

 

[Future_Prodigy]

so is the official church teaching that what was passed on was a loss of sanctifying grace?

Does that mean at baptism we are then given back that grace, cause its always said were washed of original sin (whatever that is)

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

so is the official church teaching that what was passed on was a loss of sanctifying grace?

Does that mean at baptism we are then given back that grace, cause its always said were washed of original sin (whatever that is)

I think baptism frees us from the original sin and allows us to become members of the Church.

The Sacrament of Baptism is the foundation of Christian life, the entrance to the life in the Spirit and access to the other Sacraments. Through Baptism we are freed from original sin, become heirs to the Kingdom of God, are incorporated into the Church and become sharers in the Mission of the Church. [Catechism of the Catholic Church 1994 Reference: 1213]

I don’t think baptism gives us the sanctifying grace which is a form of life - everlasting life. For life to be given you need a male and a female. In this context, the male is the new Adam, Jesus. And the female is the new Eve, His Bride, The Church.

:twocents: Just my thoughts… I’m happy to be corrected.

 

[Future_Prodigy]

In your post above you mentioned that original sin is really being born into a state where there is no santcifying grace… so how then can baptism erase original sin if it does not then reinstate the sanctifying grace that we were born without (which you see as ‘original sin’).

 

[mdcpensive1]

To Future Prodigy:

My understanding of Original Sin is that Adam and Eve who were our first parents in a sense had something called “preternatural gifts” which were something that allowed their tendencies and desires to be “ordered” so as to allow their relationship with God to be something special “they walked with God” from Genesis. Their ordered tendencies allowed them to live the way God wanted them to live to have the relationship He wanted them to have for their happiness and well-being. For example, they were not subject to death or lacked basic requirements.

The sin that they committed removed the “ordered tendencies” they had within them and made them more self conscious and self-centered. Since these gifts were taken away, their offspring (us) do not have them and we sin because we have not developed self control to know God as He should be known and to treat His creation with the proper respect due something created good.

Sanctifying Grace is the way back to our home when we are made children of God. It starts with Baptism and intensifies as we grow in holiness.

Hope this helps, mdcpensive1

 

[jpjd]

In your post above you mentioned that original sin is really being born into a state where there is no santcifying grace… so how then can baptism erase original sin if it does not then reinstate the sanctifying grace that we were born without (which you see as ‘original sin’).

Baptism DOES reinstate the sanctifying grace that we were born without. When the priest “washes away sin” in the sacrament of baptism, grace is washing over the soul, filling the vacuum that was there.

 

[Michael_Mary]

I observe myself, and this world. In both there is an enormous propensity (at the least) for, and actual manifestation (often at the worst) for/of sin.

There must be an origin for this.

While I see the innately pure nature of humanity, I also see how twisted it can be.

There must be an origin for that twistedness.

While I believe the Adam & Eve story is an anology, it is, for me a very good and perfect anology for the origan on this twisted sinfulness manifesting in life.

And it points only to the concept of Original Sin.

Original Sin is a difficult and disturbing concept to wrap your head around. The (name removed by moderator)lications are overwhelming.

For me, constant participation in the Holiness of the sacraments of Confession and Mass give me sanity even in the insane rollercoaster of living in a life and world that constantly reveals the twisted nature of all that is sin.

I’m not trying to be overly weird, here.

But human language is limited, and we’re talking about something that is beyond the bounds of words.

 

[Crumpy]

Scott Hahn and Mike Aquilino were discussing this very subject tonight 11/20/07 on EWTN.

My memory fails on the specifics but the general picture is this.

The depiction of creation is this sequence of days, ending in the 7th day rest. This 7 days stuff is somehow an indication of the covenant of God with Adam. The original Hebrew words that command Adam to till the garden of Eden are actually the same Hebrew words that are used to describe the duties of temple liturgy, described much later.

The original sin idea comes from Adam and Eve breaking the covenant, which in general but-don’t-ask-me-to-explain means that Adam and Eve were subject to death.

So, representing all of humanity, they committed this first sin, this first breaking of the covenant, which situation we all inherit.

That’s how they explained the pivotal event which we take as original sin, the rending of the covenant with God.

 

[Chesster]

so is the official church teaching that what was passed on was a loss of sanctifying grace?

Yes, according to Ludwig Ott, “Original Sin consists in the deprivation of grace caused by the free act of sin committed by the head of the race. (Sent. communis.)”

Does that mean at baptism we are then given back that grace, cause its always said were washed of original sin (whatever that is)

Yes, sanctifying grace is bestowed at baptism.

 

[neophyte]

…Can someone please explain the meaning of original sin.

From the Catechism: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.” 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. 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.

1. Although it is proper to each individual, 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 toward God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle.
   usccb.org/catechism/text/pt1sect2chpt1art1p7.htm#404

 

[grandfather]

In your post above you mentioned that original sin is really being born into a state where there is no santcifying grace… so how then can baptism erase original sin if it does not then reinstate the sanctifying grace that we were born without (which you see as ‘original sin’).

Baptism does restore sanctifying grace, that which was lost to us by Adam and Eve. There are many questions that arise from this claim of faith, but for now leave it at that. Although grace can be restored to us we still have natures that have a tendency to sin. This tendency is called concupiscence. I have not seen any commentary about this, but our first parents must also have had this tendency or they would not have fallen. They faced temptation or a test and failed. An analogy is on the material level. Assume a family had certain wealth. They owned property and businesses and had money. This wealth could be passed on to generations to come, but if someone who held responsibility for it did something to lose it all, there would be nothing to pass on. So scripture says that children suffer for the sins of their fathers. Well the fathers were once children also. Whose sins did they suffer for, but their fathers? Beyond baptism people fall into various sins. Whoever sins is a slave to sin, Jesus says. But He gives us a way to escape, to be restored by His grace. He gives us the power and means to overcome, to gain true victory over sin. Those who have not experienced this, but recognize their personal sin, often believe it is impossible to get victory. This is tragic. The means are the sacraments. A Protestant friend converted and went to her first confession. I asked her how it went. She said the euphoria did not set in until she got in her car. This is not simply a matter of going through motions and saying words. There is an experience of being freed from the bonds of evil that is quite amazing. The Eucharist strengthens us in grace. The sacraments have to be approached properly, but that is another topic. Confession is an extension of our baptism. It frees us when we fall, or re-fall.

 

[epostle]

good post, Grandfather.

FAULT LINES
Original sin is the term we use to describe mankind’s first transgression – Adam’s fall. It is also the term we use to describe the consequences or effects of that fall. For Adam, original sin was a personal, actual sin. For us, it’s an impersonal sin, not an actual sin. But here we distinguish; we do not separate, because it’s all of a piece. There is a bond that unites sin in all its forms.

When teachers discuss the mystery of original sin, they often use the metaphor of a “stain on the soul”. But that’s only a metaphor. Sin isn’t essentially a stain; it isn’t a spiritual substance. It isn’t a thing at all. It is, rather, the lack of something, the absence of something, namely sanctifying grace. The indwelling life of the Trinity was evacuated from human nature by Adam’s sin. That’s what original sin is. We have to get at it by explaining what it isn’t. It’s the absence of something necessary for human beings to reach their divinely appointed end. The absence of sanctifying grace certainly does plunge us into darkness and blindness and death.

But it’s critically important for us to recognize that original sin is not something that’s transmitted biologically or psychologically. Yet at the same time we can speak of original sin as being something hereditary. 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.

Original sin is the hereditary but impersonal fault of Adam’s descendants: One man’s trespass led to condemnation for all men…By one man’s disobedience many were made sinners, who have sinned in him. (Rom 5:18-19)

The mystery, of course, is how we sinned in Adam. We sinned in Adam, in a sense, because there is a mystical solidarity we share with him, based upon two realities: biologically, we’re his descendants; and theologically, he’s our covenant head. As our father, he is our representative in making the covenant with God. Since he broke the covenant, we, his progeny, inherit the consequences. Consider an analogy from human relations: If I mismanaged my business affairs and ended by declaring bankruptcy before passing my estate to my sons and daughter, my creditors could pursue my children, now rendered debtors through our family bond.

In effect, original sin means the loss of sanctifying grace and, therefore, the loss of eternal life. The soul is immortal, and people in hell will live everlastingly, though miserably. Eternal life is more than everlasting. It is God’s life, divine life. God alone is eternal because He utterly transcends time. So when we speak of eternal life, we are talking about sharing in the very being and communion of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. And that is what humanity lost through original sin.

Original sin is hereditary but impersonal. It is contracted, not committed; and we contract original sin without consent. That is why God can remove original sin without personal consent, as He does with newborn babies on their baptismal day.

The same thing can be said for actual sin. Actual sin can only be committed through informed consent. And so it can only be removed through informed consent. That’s why we need confession.

con’t…

 

[epostle]

THE LAW OF (MORAL) GRAVITY
It can be helpful to keep in mind that sin is like a terminal – but curable – illness, one that afflicts all of the organs of the body. Only in this case, it affects the eternal life of the soul.
Are people better off not knowing that they are sick? Or how accessible (though difficult) the cure is? Are they any happier not being told how serious – but also how treatable – their condition is?
For me, the key is remembering that sin is more than breaking laws, it is breaking lives – our own and others’.

Likewise, our spiritual life is far more precious – and fragile – than physical life. And far more fulfilling, eternally speaking.

Just because people don’t recognize all (or any) of God’s laws, and how they reflect His loving concern for our spiritual and physical health, doesn’t change the fact that it’s all still true. If an overwhelming majority of Americans wanted to abolish the law of gravity, and so both houses of congress voted to repeal it, and the president signed it into law – what would happen if the president and all the congressman decided to celebrate their “liberation” by jumping off the White House roof? They wouldn’t break the law of gravity, of course; their fall would demonstrate gravity, and that law would break them and whatever bones hit first.

What people often forget is that the moral laws of God are just as firmly fixed as the physical laws – it’s just that the results of sin are not as visible or immediately painful as broken bones.

That’s why the church has to get the word out – both the bad news of sin’s deadly effect, and the Good News of Christ as the only total cure. And again, that’s why we need confession.

“Lord, Have Mercy” The Healing Power of Confession by Scott Hahn, Doubleday, April 2003, pg. 72-75

 

[Tallon]

I find it hard to see the world as fallen, damaged and or corrupted by some force called original sin. I tend to at times share the belief that all creation isnt born into sin but it is certain socities that are that are sinful, so if we are born into them then technically we are born into sin. Man was born with goodness, truth and the highest potential ofr human evolution but if your born into a racist country that has unequal distribution of wealth, etc then you are born into sin. It is our socio-economic situations that cause these ‘sins’ not some primordial fall of disobeying God that has forever cursed humanity, and every innocent sentient being thereafter. This seems to be a low view of creation.

Can someone please explain the meaning of original sin.

You’d be surprised at what can be explained by natural selection.

 

[WayneTalbot]

The non-Catholic Christian view, and one that I believe has better Scriptural support, is that we are born with a propensity to sin, not with any specific sin derived from or shared with Adam. The decision to sin, or not sin, is entirely ours, but because we are not perfect as Jesus was, we all will sin. All sin is forgiven those who repent, through the sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross. Infant baptism is a contentious issue in Christian circles for this and other reasons. If there is no “original sin” per se, there is no need of infant baptism. The non-Catholic Christian view of baptism is that it is a deliberate choice to be born again in the Spirit, and this can only occur when an individual has sufficient maturity to understand the commitment. Another reason to doubt the Catholic, or other practice of infant baptism.
While not intending to start a debate on this subject, it has already been debated at length over many centuries by theologians, academics, and others, a reading of the New Testament without any prior teachings on sin and baptism may well lead one to the non-Catholic view.