On Original Sin, Simon

Simón Apablaza

ON ORIGINAL SIN Why did original sin leads to death? Catholic essay. For since death came through a human being, the resurrection of the dead has also come through a human being; for as all die in Adam, so all will be made alive in Christ (1 Cor 15:21-22).

Original sin is presupposed for the universal need of redemption. All have necessity of redemption. Moreover, only Christ can suffice this universal need. To understand the reality of sin is necessary to understand the profound relationship that existed between God and men, a relation that through sin has been broken.1 We will see how original sin can be described as a privation of the sanctifying grace; we will answer the question of why original sin leads to death, passing through the doctrines of St Augustine, St Thomas and the Magistery of the Church, especially the council of Trent.

The fall The lord God commanded the man, “you may freely eat of every tree of the garden; but of the tree of knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die” (Gen 2:16).

This text gives a proof of the initial freedom that man has had since the beginning. Later in the text, the serpent appears bringing the temptation, as something brought from outside. (Gen 3:1-5) The serpent will be later interpreted as the devil (Cf. Sap 2:24; Jn 8:44). When the serpent says to the woman “you shall be like gods”, the serpent puts before the woman not only a temptation, but in some sense an implied criticism too, as if the serpent were saying: you want to be like gods, and you should be like gods, but you are not!.2 The serpent is undermining their reality of creatures, as if there were something wrong with just being human. Original sin then, is not (only) a sin of 1 2

Catechism of the catholic church(CCC), (St Pauls, Homebush, 1994), 386 cf. Neil Ormerod, Grace and Disgrace, anthology of self esteem, Society and History,(E.J. Dwayer, Australia, 1992) 158-59.

1

Simón Apablaza

gluttony (they eat something that was good to the eyes), but as an act of wanting to become “like God, knowing good and evil” (Gen 3:5). A formal description of this sin would be disobedience, as we find in the letter to the Romans, chapter 5:19, “for just as by the one’s man disobedience, the many were made sinners, so by the one’s man obedience the many will be made righteous”. The same idea id found in the catechism: “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 towards God and lack of trust in his goodness”.3 St Thomas would say latter that the tree of knowledge was called that not because it had the power to cause any knowledge, but because of the consequences: “by eating of it man learned by experience the difference between the good of obedience and the evil of disobedience”.4 The biblical description of original sin, corresponds to the human structure of man, that is, of soul and body. On the one hand, original sin is an spiritual act (disobedience, pride); and on the other hand, the sensual pleasures are involved (The tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and the tree was to be desired to make one wise. Gen 3:6). However, the decisive moment was the pride that detaches man from God. Man wanted to be like God, he preferred himself to God, against the requirements of his creaturely status, and therefore against his own good, he wanted to be like God but without God, before God, and not in accordance with God5; thus he disobeyed. Original Justice Before the fall, our progenitors lived in a state called by theologians as original Justice. This state composed different elements: Sanctifying grace; Integrity; Immortality; Happiness; Enlightenment. 6 Let us, briefly, see each one of them. Sanctifying grace: this was the most precious of all the gifts, since it made them partakers of the divine nature. It would have made them pass to heaven to behold God face to face in an eternal bliss. Without this sanctifying grace, this is impossible. 3 4

5 6

CCC § 398 Thomas Aquinas, Compendium of Theology,(B.Herder Book CO. London, 1948), ch 188. CCC § 397 Michael Sheehan, Apolologetics and Catholic Doctrine, (The Saint Austin Press, London 2000), 360-1; cf. Joseph Pohle, God the Author of Nature and the Supernatural, a Dogmatic Treatise,(B.Herder, London; 1912), p 271.

2

Simón Apablaza

Integrity: since man was totally obedient to God, their passions were obedient to man, the appetites of the flesh were under the check of reason. This gift of integrity gave them the fitness for receiving the sanctifying grace. Immortality and happiness: they were free (immune) from suffering and death. God shielded them or gave them such knowledge that they were immune to these evils. Enlightenment: God gave them power of speech, the knowledge of moral to live and to pass to their children, and such knowledge of science as to be happy and to respond to the circumstances in which they lived.7 Privation of grace and Death The harmony and the integrity of the original justice, was utterly shattered after the sin of Adam. Once man did not accept the subjection to God, all the powers subjected to reason of man rebelled too. They did not follow reason anymore, but rather they resist reason. This is the rebellion of which scriptures speak: “Flesh against the spirit” (Rom 7:23).8 Adam forfeited all these privileges for himself and the whole human race, and they were replaced by their contraries: Privation of grace, concupiscence, mortality, and passibility.9 It is in this sense, that all men are “children of wrath” (Eph 2:3). Through the sanctifying grace, the light of wisdom shone and guided man. After the sin, it grew dim in his intellect, and so, his love went to the sensible things (instead of God), and loving them, he wandered further away from God and fell into repeated sins. Moreover, in order to fulfil his disordered inclinations, his loyalty went to other things rather than God. hence idolatry and other various sins arose into humankind.(cf. Rom 1:24) 10 Privation of grace in a sense, means the impossibility of being united to God (the giver of life) form whom we receive life. The submission of the body and the senses to reason depends upon the submission of the submission of our spirit to God. Since we are no longer in contact with the source of life, it is only coherent the entry of death on

7 8 9 10

Cf St Thomas Aquinas, Summa theological. i,q.94,aa.1,3. Aquinas, Compendium of Theology, Ch 192. Pohle, God the Author of Nature and the Supernatural, p 271. Cf. Augustine, On Nature and Grace, in Nicene and post-Nicene Fahters of the Christian Church. Ed Philip Schaff. (T&T Clark, Edinburgh; 1987), § 24; cf. Aquinas, Compendium of Theology,Ch 194.

3

Simón Apablaza

the world, thus the condemnation: “you are dust and to dust you shall return” (Gen 3:19). St Thomas says that because of the corruption experience in the body (as consequence of original sin), man incurred the “necessity of dying”. His soul was no longer able to sustain the body forever by conferring life to it. “Thus man became subjected to suffering and death”.11 In this context, death is to be understood as a physical death, as it is taught in the synod of cartage12 (against the pelagians), and the second council of orange13 and as it is presupposed by the Tridentine decree on original sin.14 However, the council of Trent states too, that sin is the death of the soul15, we shall see this in more detail. We have seen that original justice enable us to participate in the life of God, Sanctifying Grace. Therefore, being the Privation of the divine life, death (that is the privation of the divine life) can be described as fundamental consequence of the original sin.

St Augustine For St Augustine, the first sin is fundamentally a sin of pride. The temptation comes from outside man, from the devil, and it is only Eve that believed to the promises of Satan and Adam may have sinned as an act of solidarity with Eve (cf. 1Tm 2:14).16 St Augustine’s systematic work will come to maturation with the controversies against Pelagius. Death as consequence of sin St Augustine says that original sin brings about two deaths. The first dead consist in the dead of the soul, the lose of the divine life, and in the dead of the body. The second death is the eternal punishment of the soul, united to the body, in hell. The threat of Gen 2,17, “in the day that you eat of it, you shall die”, comprehends both 11 12

13 14 15 16

Aquinas, Compendium of Theology, Ch 193. The Christian Faith, In the doctrinal Documents of the Catholic Church, (Nd) Ed, Jackes Dupuis (Theological Publications in India, Bangalore, 1996), 501/The concordance with Denzinger-Shömetzer (Dz), 222 Nd 505/ Dz. 372 Nd 508/Dz. 1511s Nd 509/Dz. 1512 Saint Augustine, City of God, ed Vernon Bourke (Image Books, New Cork, 1958)§ 14,11,2

4

Simón Apablaza

meanings. The death of the soul is definitive, “it occurs when the life of the soul (which is God) abandons it”.17 St Augustine on the treatise “On Nature and grace”, arguing against Pelagius says that those who are in sin are dead. The truth designates them as dead; whence the passage “let the dead bury their dead”. He says against Pelagius that we were not created with the ability to pass from righteous to sin, and come back again, but that in order to come back to righteousness, one needs “a vivifier, because he is dead”.18 Those that are in darkness await for the command to be given “Sleeper awake! Rise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you” (Eph 5:14). The dead of the soul is leads to sin, since life (that is God) is not in it. So the soul produces dead works until it is vivified through the grace of Christ. The same idea we find in the treatise On Forgiveness of sins, and baptism, that he believes that the death referred to, in the book of Genesis: “on the day you eat you shall surely die”, is the death of the soul that takes place in sin.19 He states that the death of the body, is product of sin too. “You are dust and to dust you shall return” refers to the body only, since the soul is immaterial. Adam would, had he not sinned, “have been changed into a spiritual body, and would have passed into the incorruptible state… without the peril of dead”.20 So in some sense the mortal body (mortal: capable of dying) was immortal because “there was no necessity for its dying”.21 Therefore, if the body dies it is only because of sin, as the apostle says “But if Christ is in you, though the body is death because of sin, the Spirit is life because of righteousness. Is the spirit of him who raised Jesus from the death dwells in you, he who raised Christ from the death will give life to your mortal bodies also through his Spirit that dwells in you” (Rom 8:10-11). The body is dead not because of anything other but sin. And in other place “just as sin came into the world through one man, and death came through sin” (Rom 5:12) can anything other be understood by this words? 22

17 18 19

20 21 22

Augustine, City of God, , §13,15. Augustine, On Nature and Grace, §25 cf. Augustine, On Forgiveness of Sins, and Baptism, in the Nicene and postNicene Fathers of the Christian Church. Ed Philip Schaff. (T&T Clark, Edinburgh; 1987)§2 Augustine, On Forgiveness of Sins, and Baptism,§2 Augustine, On Forgiveness of Sins, and Baptism, §3,5 Augustine, On Forgiveness of Sins, and Baptism,§4.

5

Simón Apablaza

To the first death, it follows a second kind, one that is the eternal, “unless by God’s grace man is delivered from it”.23 As it is, because of original sin, all men are condemned to it, as scriptures say “one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all” (Rom 5:18). Nor can there be a middle place for man, so a man can only be with the devil when is not with Christ (death or life). The example of the infant baptized is used by Augustine, saying “if he is already with Christ, why is he baptized?” Because he is not with Christ, but against Christ (cf. Mat 12:30). And how can he be against Christ is it is not because of sin; and since he is “innocent” for he cannot sin on his own, “what sin can be found at such an age, except the ancient and original sin?”24 But Christ that came to heal the sick; has died for all to cancel the ancient debt. He rose again and is seated at the right hand of the father interceding for us. It is through him that we can be saved, and only through his grace that we can be delivered from eternal death. Concupiscence The term concupiscence normally is understood as an egoistic tendency (cf Gal 5:19f) but in Augustine is intended as the sensual appetite as it has lose the harmony with the spiritual appetite, the will. Concupiscence is seen clearer in the sexual field and it assists to propagate the original sin. As St Paul in Rom 7, Augustine calls concupiscence “sin”, but not sin in the normal sense. Augustine affirms that the apostle calls concupiscence sin only as a way of saying, since it comes from sin and it becomes stronger because of sin.25 Therefore is a mistake that to identify original sin with concupiscence. Yet Augustine stresses the importance of concupiscence, even if it is obvious that baptism takes proper and true guilt away. In baptism, concupiscence is freed from its guilty character but it stays in the baptized “for the fight”.26 In the non-baptized though, concupiscence and sin constitute a whole. Concupiscence and guilt united accomplish the lose of the divine life of grace, the death of the soul as explain above. The death of the soul constitutes in fact the

23 24 25 26

Augustine, City of God, § 13,15 Augustine, On Forgiveness of Sins, and Baptism, § 55 Augustine, On Marriage and Concupiscence. §1,23,25. Sheehan, Apolologetics and Catholic Doctrine, 368.

6

Simón Apablaza

essence of original sin as is interpreted by the council of Orange and latter the council of Trent.27

St Thomas For St Thomas the consequence of original sin, is the loss of original justice. Death and decay of the body came only naturally as a consequence of it. Since we have no more contact with the source of life (God), because we have parted from sanctifying grace, we tasted death and therefore the punishment, “you are dust and to dust you shall return”. Consequences of original sin Because of original sin, man’s reason became subject to ignorance, since it has being depraved of its order of truth. His will became subject to malice, since it has been deprived of the order of good. His irascible sense appetite, losses its strength in face of difficulty, this is the wound of weakness. His concupiscible sense appetite loses its subjection to reason and so, it is wounded by concupiscence.28 Sin wounds human nature, but does not destroy it. Adam remains a rational being even after sin; this means that he maintains his freedom. However, the possibility of recovery is difficult by the fact that sin lessens man’s natural inclination to virtue, since sin is the contrary to virtue, every sin must therefore diminish the natural inclination of man towards good. 29 Death is as well penalty for sin. Is Adam had not sinned, he would have been immortal and not only him, but also his descendants would have been immortal. But as a consequence of his sin, he lost immortality for him and for all his descendants, and now every human being must suffer the death of the body.30 But why should we die even after baptism if baptism takes guilt away. It should take away the consequence (death) as well? St Thomas answers that sins are removed by baptism, both actual and original. However: “it is right that we should fist of all be conformed to Christ’s sufferings before attaining the immortality and impassibility of glory… hence it is necessary that our bodies should remain for a time, subject to 27 28 29 30

Nd 505; 509/ Dz 372; 1512. S.Th. ii,q.85,3. S.Th. ii,q.85,1. S.Th. ii,q.85,5.

7

Simón Apablaza

suffering, in order that we may merit the impassibility of glory, in conformity with Christ”.31 We must understand thought, that immortality is not natural to our nature; if Adam was immortal, it was only through a special gift from God. And God through his grace will rise us again to immortality at the end of time again.32 Although the sin of Adam affected the whole human nature (and creation), nor was any repentance or act of his, able to restore nature to its first estate. Furthermore, the status of original justice was a gift of grace, and not the result of merit. Much less could Adam after the fall, gain by merit of his repentance the gift of Grace.33 Nevertheless, it was decreed by plan of the divine providence that human nature should be restored. And so God sent his own son; God became man and being man he was able to restore man and to offer satisfaction that is demanded by Justice. Indeed, it is because only he occupied a position of pre-eminence over the whole nature that he is able to be the cause of grace. This is the reason of the incarnation as the apostle said, “Christ Jesus came into this world to save sinners” (1Tim 1:15).34

Council of Trent The council of Trent, was a time for deeper reflection on original sin. Luther’s experience of our sinful state and the inclination to evil, leads him into exaggerations in minimising the idea of original state of righteousness. The council pronounced the doctrine of original justice, the fall of our parents, and the sinful state inherited by all. Again Pelagian errors and others that said that the children of christian marriages did not contract original sin were refuted. 35 The council of Trent agreed with the Protestant Reformers that original sin was equated with the lack of Sanctifying grace, but against the reformers, that said that the original sin did not consisted in concupiscence itself, since it remans even in the justified by baptism. Therefore, original sin was rather the lack of “original righteousness and holiness”.36 31 32 33 34 35

36

S.Th. ii,q.85,5. S.Th. ii,q.85,6. Aquinas, Compendium of Theology, Ch 198. Aquinas, Compendium of Theology, Ch 199-200. The Christian Faith, In the doctrinal Documents of the Catholic Church, Ed, Jackes Dupuis (Theological Publications in India, Bangalore, 1996), introduction p181-182. 185. Cf. Richard P. McBrien, Catholicism, Vol I (Dove Communications U.S.A, 1980), p.164.

8

Simón Apablaza

The council explained what was lost by the fall, the life of grace, freedom from concupiscence and from death, and it explained what is restored by baptism and what is not. The council of Trent is the principal magisterial font in regard Original sin. Because of this, it is important to consider its principal lines. The six canons are divided in three parts, the first two rebuke the Pelagian thesis quoting the text of the council of Orange with some modifications. The three following canons describe the remedy to original sin. The last canon state the exception for the Virgin Mary.37 The first canon stresses the lose of the original state, that of “holiness and Justice”, and that the whole of Adam’s sin and body was change “for the worse through the offence of his sin”. The second canon is important for us. It speaks about the death of the body and of the soul. It says that Adam has lost the “holiness and Justice received by God” for him and for all his descendants, and that “stained by the sin of disobedience, he transmitted to all humankind only death and the sufferings of the body” and the “sin as well, which is the death of the soul”. It then quotes St Paul, “Sin came into the world through one man, and death through sin, and also (death) spread to all as all sinned in him” (Rom 5:12). The third canon states the propagation of the original sin. Adam has denied the human race not only with his bad example but with the transmission of the sin as well, and that it cannot be removed by any merit but that of Jesus Christ. The fourth canon quotes the second anathema, of the synod of Carthage,38 supporting the importance of the baptism in babies for the remission of the original sin. The fifth canon goes against the protestants, it says that baptism takes away all stain of original sin, and that the justified man is pure and innocent before God. Then it speaks about the permanence of concupiscence in the baptized, non as sin, but as a possibility of receiving merits. The sixth canon underlines that the council does not want to include in the original sin the Blessed Virgin Mary.

37 38

Nd. 508-513 /Dz 1511-1516. Nd, 501 /Dz 222.

9

Simón Apablaza

The council of Trent, in sum, teaches the universality of original sin against the pelagians and the reformators, and puts in surface the difference between original sin and concupiscence. Baptism makes us pure, even if remains in us a weakness against which we must fight.

Victory over original sin Baptism cancels original sin. But this initial victory is not the final point. Baptismal grace is given as a seed that needs yet to grow and to be protected against evil. In grave sin, sanctifying grace is lost and man goes back again (in a worst way than before) under the slavery of the evil one. Death is still with us, but thanks to our Lord Jesus Christ, there is the resurrection. However, to share in this gift of the resurrection, there is a fierce battle awaiting us, because even after baptism the inclination to evil remains, concupiscence, that immerses us in this path, a “hard battle”.39 “The while of man’s history has been the story of dour combat with the powers of evil, stretching, so our Lord tells us, from the very down of history until the last Day. Finding himself in the mist of the battlefield man has to struggle to do what is right, an it is at a great cost of himself, and aided by God’s grace, that he succeeds in achieving his own inner integrity.40 The last victory is shown with the Parousia that will bring a new cosmos, resplendent of the glory of Christ. God will take away all evil –from the devil and from human sin, and he can lead history to his design even through the failings of his creatures. It is with this spirit that we can sing with the Exulted, “oh happy fault, which deserve so great a saviour!”.41

39 40 41

CCC, title for Ch 407-9 Gaudium et spes §37, quoted in CCC §409 CCC § 410-2 and references.

10

Simón Apablaza

Bibliography Catechism of the Catholic Church. St Pauls/Libreria Editrice Vaticana. Homebush. 1994. Farrell, Walter. Healy, martin. My Way of Life, Pocket Edition to St Thomas. Confraternity of the Precious Blood, Brooklyn, 1952. Garrigou- Lagrange, R. OP. Predestination. Tr Dom Bede Rose OSB. B. Herder Book CO. London, 1953. Mann, William. “Augustine on Evil and Original Sin”, in The Cambridge Companion to Augustine. Ed Eleonore Stump and Norman Kretzmann. Cambridge University Press, 2001. McBrien, Richard P. Catholicism. Vol I . Dove Communications U.S.A. 1980. Pohle, Joseph. God, the Author of Nature and the Supernatural. A dogmatic Treatise. B Herder , London 1912. Sheehan, Michael. Apolologetics and Catholic Doctrine. The Saint Austin Press, London 2000. St Augustine, City of God, ed Vernon Bourke. Image Books, New Cork. 1958. St Augustine. “On Nature and Grace”. “On Forgiveness of Sins, and Baptism”. “On Marriage and Concupiscence”. In the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church. Ed Philip SCAF. Vol 5. T&T Clark, Edinburg. 1987. St. Thomas Aquinas. Compendium of Theology. B.Herder Book CO. London, 1948 St Thomas Aquinas. Suma Theologica. Benzinger Bros. c 1947. in the Electronic Edition of Harmony Media. Inc. Ormerod, Neil. Grace and Disgrace. A theology of Self-esteem, Society and History. E.J Dwyer, 1992. The Christian Faith, In the doctrinal Documents of the Catholic Church. Ed, Jackes Dupuis. Theological Publications in India. Bangalore, 1996.

11