Born Into Mortal Sin?

[add]

Original Sin is nothing else than despising the authority of God and, consequently, all authority. Thus, males and females, each in their own way, enter fallen human existence as selfish and disobedient persons.

[IcePrincessKRS]

Original Sin is nothing else than despising the authority of God and, consequently, all authority. Thus, males and females, each in their own way, enter fallen human existence as selfish and disobedient persons.

 

That's not exactly how the Church teaches it....

 

"Q 53: What was the Original Sin?

 

Adam, the first man, abused his freedom by disobeying and rejecting God's care. He wanted to search for happiness in his own way. This, coupled with the sin of Eve, was the Original Sin.

 

God created man in a state of holiness, but man abused his freedom as a result of Satan's temptation. He defied God and sought happiness apart from him.

......

 

Q 54: Why are all men conceived and born into Original Sin?

 

When Adam sinned, he lost original holiness and justice. He cut himself off from God, and his human nature was harmed in it's natural powers, and sickness and death entered his life. In losing these gifts he could not pass them on to his descendants.

 

As a result, people are born into this world separated from their loving Father and subject to death. The main sign of sin is the world is man's rejection of God. Other signs are war, poverty, starvation, hatred of people,
violence, and other injustices. "

 

(The above quotes are from The Apostolate's Family Catechism by Rev. Lawrence G. Lovasik, S.V.D. I've been going over this with my kids this week so it's very fresh on my mind. [This program is taught by Cardinal Arinze, too.])

 

CCC: 397 Man, tempted by the devil, let his trust in his Creator die in his heart and, abusing his freedom, disobeyed God's command. This is what man's first sin consisted of. All subsequent sin would be disobedience toward God and lack of trust in His goodness.

 

CCC: 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.

 405 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 towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man
and summon him to spiritual battle.

Edited February 1, 2013 by IcePrincessKRS

[rkwright]

Apo, we've been through this a while back and have debated the original sin issue before. Your explanation in this thread of "in communion" but seemingly different views was much better than earlier threads - thank you!

I have a question, and I think I may know the answer... Take 4 hypothetical people (A) the unbaptised yet sinless child (B) the unbaptised sinner (C) the baptized but sinner in state of mortal sin, and (D) the baptized repentant sinner yet not in a state of mortal sin
Where do each end up according to EO theology?

[Groo the Wanderer]

Each ends up at the mercy of God. It's His decision and only He knows.

[Apotheoun]

Apo, we've been through this a while back and have debated the original sin issue before. Your explanation in this thread of "in communion" but seemingly different views was much better than earlier threads - thank you!

I have a question, and I think I may know the answer... Take 4 hypothetical people (A) the unbaptised yet sinless child (B) the unbaptised sinner (C) the baptized but sinner in state of mortal sin, and (D) the baptized repentant sinner yet not in a state of mortal sin.

Where do each end up according to EO theology?

I wrote the following post a few years ago.  It presents a threefold schema that at least to a degree can be applied to your hypothetical questions in order to give a partial Orthodox response.

 

 

 

The Eastern tradition holds that there will be degrees of glory for those who participate in the vision of God, and that the divine vision entails a never-ending movement (i.e., epektasis) or infinite progression into the tri-hypostatic God, who is infinitely beyond the infinite, but there is no "limbo" nor is an innocent man ever damned.  

 

Thus, I believe:

 

1. That an unbaptized baby that dies in infancy experiences the vision of God received through the incarnation of the eternal Logos, but does not receive the glory given through baptism, chrismation, and eucharist, or through the practice of ascetic virtue.

 

2. That a baptized baby that dies before reaching the age of reason receives the glory given through the sacraments of baptism, chrismation, and eucharist, but does not receive the glory given through ascetic practice.

 

3. That a man who is fully initiated into the Church through baptism, chrismation, and eucharist, and who goes on to live a life of virtue receives the glory of the sacraments, and the glory achieved in cooperation with God's energy through the practice of ascesis.

 

Finally, as St. Gregory Palamas said: "Sensible light shows things to our senses. The intellectual light is to manifest the truth which is contained in thoughts. But those who receive the spiritual or supernatural Light, perceive what is beyond all intellect. They participate in the divine energies and become themselves, in a sort, Light. When they unite to the Light, they see with it in full all that is hidden from those who have not seen the grace of Light. The Uncreated Light is the Light where God makes Himself manifest to those who enter into union with Him."

 

Taken from a thread called:  Unbaptized Infants

[Apotheoun]

Apo, we've been through this a while back and have debated the original sin issue before. Your explanation in this thread of "in communion" but seemingly different views was much better than earlier threads - thank you!

I have a question, and I think I may know the answer... Take 4 hypothetical people (A) the unbaptised yet sinless child (B) the unbaptised sinner (C) the baptized but sinner in state of mortal sin, and (D) the baptized repentant sinner yet not in a state of mortal sin.

Where do each end up according to EO theology?

In the paragraph below I have tried to apply the schema I gave in my previous post to the four hypothetical individuals listed in your post:

 

Point number one would apply in the case of the unbaptized (yet sinless child), that is to say, the child would receive the glory given through the incarnation, but without the glory achieved through the holy mysteries or the practice of ascesis.  Clearly the child would not be damned, which is a notion utterly foreign to the Eastern tradition.  As far as the unbaptized adult's final state of being is concerned, that would be determined by whether or not he was culpable for his lack of baptism, and by whether he cooperated with the graces he received from God or not in his attempt to live a virtuous life, something of course that God alone can determine with certitude.  In the third hypothetical case, that is, in the case of the baptized man who fails to live virtuously, he would suffer damnation, again depending upon the level of his culpability, which is something only God can know, since He alone can see the secrets of the heart.  Finally, the baptized repentant man would receive the glory that comes from the incarnation, and the glory of the sacraments, and - depending upon how he lived his life - the glory that comes through ascetic practice, God alone being able to judge the man's life in order to determine the degree of glory to be given.

[Nihil Obstat]

It should be admitted that the Eastern views on the subject seem to carry a certain force of common sense and intuitive moral understanding.