The Byzantine Forum
Newest Members
Galumph, Leon_C, Rocco, Hvizsgyak, P.W.
5,984 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 456 guests, and 39 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Photos
St. Sharbel Maronite Mission El Paso
St. Sharbel Maronite Mission El Paso
by orthodoxsinner2, September 30
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
Holy Saturday from Kirkland Lake
by Veronica.H, April 24
Byzantine Catholic Outreach of Iowa
Exterior of Holy Angels Byzantine Catholic Parish
Church of St Cyril of Turau & All Patron Saints of Belarus
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics35,389
Posts416,722
Members5,984
Most Online3,380
Dec 29th, 2019
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,132
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,132
Dear brother Otsheylnik,

I agree with most of what you write here. There is also the possibility that the impression non-Latin Christians have about the Latin Catholic Church (i.e., legalism) is not really due to them being "Latin," but generally "Western." I believe it is the Protestant groups, not the Latin Catholic Church, that has popularized the image of St. Augustine as a figure of legalism. Four particular issues stand out:
(1) The idea that Divine Justice refers to the vengeance of God.
(2) Double-predestination.
(3) Irresistible Grace
(4) That salvation is a mere legal declaration by God and not an actual ontological transformation of the Christian.

None of these legalistic concepts has its source in Latin Catholic teaching, but due to a particular interpretation of St. Augustine by the Protestants. Nevertheless, it is these concepts that have informed the image that non-Latin Christians have of Western Christianity in general, and have at times unfairly applied it to the Latin Catholic Church.

There is one matter of soteriological legalism that deserves particular mention - the idea that we inherit the guilt of Adam's Original Sin. This notion has never been the teaching of the Latin Catholic Church, much less of the Catholic Church as a whole. The idea is based on a mistranslation of the original Latin teaching from Trent. Trent taught that we inherit a reatus due to the Original Sin of Adam and Eve. Reatus is wrongly translated as "guilt" in the English texts. Unfortunately, "guilt," to English speakers, denotes "blame" more than anything else. But "blame" is not what reatus means (the correct Latin word for "blame" is not reatus, but culpa). Reatus refers to the state of moral and ontological necessity to recover the unity with God that was lost due to the sin of our first parents. It has nothing to do with being blamed for the sin of our first parents. This misunderstanding has very unfortunately added to the image of the Latin Catholic Church as "legalistic."

Of course, this is notwithstanding the idea that we are in fact guilty of our own personal sins. I grant that the Latin Tradition lays more stress on this guilt for personal sins than does the Eastern Tradition in the doctrine of salvation. Oriental Tradition adheres to more of a middle-ground on the matter.

Blessings

Originally Posted by Otsheylnik
You know, the more I read the less I believe that Augustine actually taught things that are incompatible with the views of the eastern Church. I actually think the OP is incorrect and overestimates the reliance of the modern RC church on Augustine, as he is problematic for them in a number of areas. Most of the problems with RC legalism actually come from medieval scholastic interpretations of Augustine, rather than Augustine himself. I sometimes even wonder how much Augustine the scholastics had actually even read - for example, inventions such as limbo are totally incompatible with Augustine's theology, the modern RC interpretation of scriptural passages regarding the papacy is completely incompatible with Augustine's theology, and the list goes on. I have a nasty feeling at times when reading the scholastics that they are regurgitating quotes from Augustine and never taking the trouble to actually read him themselves, which goes back to Stuart's point. If you read one of the main works in question, it seems as if Augustine's original sin is much more like the transmitted consequences of Adam's sin of the eastern fathers than the transmitted guilt of the scholastics. Baptism is indeed for the original sin, but for it's consequences (death) rather than for imputed guilt. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/15011.htm

Of course it's also important to remember that Augustine's perspectives changed during his life time.

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 848
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 848
Dear Mardukm

Originally Posted by mardukm
Dear brother Otsheylnik,

I agree with most of what you write here. There is also the possibility that the impression non-Latin Christians have about the Latin Catholic Church (i.e., legalism) is not really due to them being "Latin," but generally "Western." I believe it is the Protestant groups, not the Latin Catholic Church, that has popularized the image of St. Augustine as a figure of legalism. Four particular issues stand out:
(1) The idea that Divine Justice refers to the vengeance of God.
(2) Double-predestination.
(3) Irresistible Grace
(4) That salvation is a mere legal declaration by God and not an actual ontological transformation of the Christian.

None of these legalistic concepts has its source in Latin Catholic teaching, but due to a particular interpretation of St. Augustine by the Protestants. Nevertheless, it is these concepts that have informed the image that non-Latin Christians have of Western Christianity in general, and have at times unfairly applied it to the Latin Catholic Church.

I agree entirely. Great points.

Originally Posted by mardukm
There is one matter of soteriological legalism that deserves particular mention - the idea that we inherit the guilt of Adam's Original Sin. This notion has never been the teaching of the Latin Catholic Church, much less of the Catholic Church as a whole. The idea is based on a mistranslation of the original Latin teaching from Trent. Trent taught that we inherit a reatus due to the Original Sin of Adam and Eve. Reatus is wrongly translated as "guilt" in the English texts. Unfortunately, "guilt," to English speakers, denotes "blame" more than anything else. But "blame" is not what reatus means (the correct Latin word for "blame" is not reatus, but culpa). Reatus refers to the state of moral and ontological necessity to recover the unity with God that was lost due to the sin of our first parents. It has nothing to do with being blamed for the sin of our first parents. This misunderstanding has very unfortunately added to the image of the Latin Catholic Church as "legalistic."

I think it should be noted that, whether based on a mistranslation or no, there certainly have been Latin clergy who have understood and taught that we had "guilt" inherited from Adam. Nonetheless, I think we both agree that Augustine didn't necessarily view things in this way.





Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,854
Likes: 8
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,854
Likes: 8
Originally Posted by Otsheylnik
I think it should be noted that, whether based on a mistranslation or no, there certainly have been Latin clergy who have understood and taught that we had "guilt" inherited from Adam.
True enough. I would simply add that as an Eastern Catholic I do not believe that man is born with either "culpa" or "reatus", instead, he is simply born mortal, and that condition does not have any impact upon his moral character at conception or birth.

Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,132
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,132
Interesting. So you don't believe that each human being is created with a necessity to recover the unity with God that was lost by our first parents. Is this your personal belief, or would you say that this is the general teaching of the Eastern (Byzantine) Tradition?

But first, a more basic question is, do you believe that the sin of our first parents resulted in a spiritual separation from God that each human being inherits?

Blessings

Originally Posted by Apotheoun
Originally Posted by Otsheylnik
I think it should be noted that, whether based on a mistranslation or no, there certainly have been Latin clergy who have understood and taught that we had "guilt" inherited from Adam.
True enough. I would simply add that as an Eastern Catholic I do not believe that man is born with either "culpa" or "reatus", instead, he is simply born mortal, and that condition does not have any impact upon his moral character at conception or birth.

Last edited by mardukm; 01/07/13 07:40 AM.
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,854
Likes: 8
A
Member
Offline
Member
A
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 2,854
Likes: 8
Originally Posted by mardukm
Interesting. So you don't believe that each human being is created with a necessity to recover the unity with God that was lost by our first parents. Is this your personal belief, or would you say that this is the general teaching of the Eastern (Byzantine) Tradition?

But first, a more basic question is, do you believe that the sin of our first parents resulted in a spiritual separation from God that each human being inherits?
As I have said in countless posts, I believe that Adam's descendants are born mortal, and that to overcome death they need the grace of God that comes only through the incarnation and paschal mystery of Christ. But no one is conceived or born guilty (in any sense of that word - i.e., either "culpa" or "reatus"). As we proclaim in the liturgy: "Christ is risen from the dead! By death He conquered death, and to those in the graves He granted life."

Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,665
Likes: 7
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 2,665
Likes: 7
does Baptism then restore to immortality?

Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 848
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 848
Originally Posted by Apotheoun
Originally Posted by mardukm
Interesting. So you don't believe that each human being is created with a necessity to recover the unity with God that was lost by our first parents. Is this your personal belief, or would you say that this is the general teaching of the Eastern (Byzantine) Tradition?

But first, a more basic question is, do you believe that the sin of our first parents resulted in a spiritual separation from God that each human being inherits?
As I have said in countless posts, I believe that Adam's descendants are born mortal, and that to overcome death they need the grace of God that comes only through the incarnation and paschal mystery of Christ. But no one is conceived or born guilty (in any sense of that word - i.e., either "culpa" or "reatus"). As we proclaim in the liturgy: "Christ is risen from the dead! By death He conquered death, and to those in the graves He granted life."


Augustine does not disagree with you. As he writes here,

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/15011.htm

the fist sin IS death. However, it is wrong to understand "death" solely in a physical sense. Therefore, the question asked "does baptism make you immortal?" is not really the right question. The question is rather does baptism bestow life? Just as Augustine uses death to refer to a set of conditions affecting the soul or nous (primarily), life as bestowed by baptism is primarily important for its effects on the soul - the correction of the effects of the original sin (death to God) allows the baptised person to embark on a process of life in Christ, much more profiound than the merely physical way in which one restricts the action of Christ to the realm of mortality. The most important thing to remember in reading Augustine is that like the eastern fathers he was a Platonist. For him concepts like death and life apply first in the realm of form and idea, and only in some secondary sense in the mortal realm. It takes his philosophy out of context to reduce the question to death in a physical sense.

Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,132
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,132
I still don't understand how you can say we are conceived or born without reatus. Reatus is the state of necessity to recover the unity with God lost by our first parents. Is this necessity of recovering the original unity with God part of human nature or not? Does not our inherent mortality in fact denote this state of necessity (reatus)?

Your claim that we are born/created/conceived without reatus seems inconsistent with your claim that we are born/created/conceived mortal. Obviously, we are born mortal because our first parents lost something, and it is a loss that we inherit, correct?

So I ask again - how can you say we are not born/created/conceived with the reatus due to the Original Sin of our first parents?

Blessings

Originally Posted by Apotheoun
Originally Posted by mardukm
Interesting. So you don't believe that each human being is created with a necessity to recover the unity with God that was lost by our first parents. Is this your personal belief, or would you say that this is the general teaching of the Eastern (Byzantine) Tradition?

But first, a more basic question is, do you believe that the sin of our first parents resulted in a spiritual separation from God that each human being inherits?
As I have said in countless posts, I believe that Adam's descendants are born mortal, and that to overcome death they need the grace of God that comes only through the incarnation and paschal mystery of Christ. But no one is conceived or born guilty (in any sense of that word - i.e., either "culpa" or "reatus"). As we proclaim in the liturgy: "Christ is risen from the dead! By death He conquered death, and to those in the graves He granted life."

Last edited by mardukm; 01/10/13 01:19 AM.
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,132
M
Member
Offline
Member
M
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 1,132
Excellent.

Originally Posted by Otsheylnik
Augustine does not disagree with you. As he writes here,

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/15011.htm

the fist sin IS death. However, it is wrong to understand "death" solely in a physical sense. Therefore, the question asked "does baptism make you immortal?" is not really the right question. The question is rather does baptism bestow life? Just as Augustine uses death to refer to a set of conditions affecting the soul or nous (primarily), life as bestowed by baptism is primarily important for its effects on the soul - the correction of the effects of the original sin (death to God) allows the baptised person to embark on a process of life in Christ, much more profiound than the merely physical way in which one restricts the action of Christ to the realm of mortality. The most important thing to remember in reading Augustine is that like the eastern fathers he was a Platonist. For him concepts like death and life apply first in the realm of form and idea, and only in some secondary sense in the mortal realm. It takes his philosophy out of context to reduce the question to death in a physical sense.

Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 19
S
Junior Member
Offline
Junior Member
S
Joined: Feb 2013
Posts: 19
Sound advice in terms of any of the Church Fathers. I have Calvinists with whom I work, but they are institutional Calvinists who teach "orthodox" Calvinism, which does not square with everything John Calvin actually wrote. The great scholar Pelikan wrote in his five volume work on The Christian Church about how "orthodox Augustinianism" appears different in certain areas from just plain ol' Augustinianism of the fourth century.

Page 2 of 2 1 2

Moderated by  theophan 

Link Copied to Clipboard
The Byzantine Forum provides message boards for discussions focusing on Eastern Christianity (though discussions of other topics are welcome). The views expressed herein are those of the participants and may or may not reflect the teachings of the Byzantine Catholic or any other Church. The Byzantine Forum and the www.byzcath.org site exist to help build up the Church but are unofficial, have no connection with any Church entity, and should not be looked to as a source for official information for any Church. All posts become property of byzcath.org. Contents copyright - 1996-2024 (Forum 1998-2023). All rights reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5