Three
Goals
About
Original Sin. As you already know, my
baptismal name is Augustine. In part,
I’m trying to defend my patron against contemporary slanders.
You
also know that my driving force is, “We believe in One Holy Catholic and
Apostolic Church.” To this, I cling with
fierce tenacity, and it informs my every thought, argument, sentence. To this aim, I see in Scripture not merely an
idyllic world, but an absolute mandate from Christ. Not merely a Spiritual Unity, though that is
all we presently have; but a bodily unity: for in the same breath we declare,
“We look for the resurrection of the dead [necessarily bodily].” To these ends, we receive one and only one baptism,
which is always rendered bodily in the flesh.
In
addition, I have some hope to arm you with facts to help you follow Christ’s
course in life. Humanly speaking, this
always feels to us as if we make important choices; but we know that without
God’s reigning hand in our lives, these choices are all futile figments. Oh, that Christ would come to us once again,
walking on the rough waters, commanding the raging sea, “peace, be still,” and
bringing us at last to safe harbor. Yes,
it does appear to me that modern Christianity in general has cut itself away
from its anchor (Hebrews) and lies in grave danger today.
With
these three ends in mind, I have no certainty that I am right, or that others
are wrong. I have only the lights of
Scripture and our Tradition instructed by Scripture, that Regal History which
we have received from our Holy Fathers and Mothers in Christ. However, I’m humbled by the fact that the
famous ship pilot of Lake Erie storm, lined-up the wrong lights, falsely
thinking that he had found safe haven, and drove his boat to certain death on
the Erie shore. These are God’s lights,
not mine; all interpretation belongs to Him.
A Problem
to Avoid
To
be blunt, it seems to me that some Church teaching is to be avoided because of
its contemporary stand on Original Sin, or the rejection of that idea. I do not see how the idea — that we are not
all guilty in Adam; and therefore death is not a punishment, but merely a
result of the fall — can possibly be true.
Rocks for
Good Foundation
However,
I agree with many thus far. Where real
sin does not exist, no guilt exists either.
God is not unjust to condemn as legally guilty, those who have not
sinned. This, I take to be an absolute
anchor point,
God cannot be unjust, it’s simply
impossible.
We
are caught between two immovable rocks:
God cannot be unjust and all mere men
sin.
Two
Inadequate Theories
Many
others fasten on an idea of corporate or seminal headship [don’t know if you
use these terms]. Sin is passed on from
Adam and Eve, either because Adam and Eve represent the human race as presiders
over it; or because it is built into the Adam and Eve genetic code. It seems to me that both of these views are
flawed, as some claim, and force God to assign guilt to the innocent: for in
both views, none of the progeny actually sinned.
The
seminal idea is just plain foolishness, for we end up with the idea that sin is
transmitted through Adam’s genetic code, not through Eve’s genetic code. This is the logical necessity for Christ to
be born sinless. How can it possibly be
true that sin is transmitted through Adam’s genetic code and not equally
through Eve’s genetic code? Are not Adam
and Eve both equally human? Obviously,
logic in and of itself is not a safe guide.
The
corporate idea is no better, for I am made a sinner simply by Adam’s
decision. This, the prophets
emphatically deny, “The fathers have eaten sour grapes and the children’s teeth
are set on edge ... The soul that sins; it shall die.” We may have escaped the seminal rocks of
destruction, but we are no better off than we were before. It is impossible to escape the idea that we
have accused God of being unjust. Me
genoito!
A Sincere
Proposal
It
seems to me that the exact opposite idea of the seminal idea solves the
problem. That, we did not genetically
receive sin from Adam; but rather that, we mysteriously participated in
Adam. Somehow, in a manner beyond all
human understanding, we were there, in the Garden of Eden, physically, bodily
participating in Adam’s sin. Mystically,
Adam’s sin is our sin, we did it; Adam’s guilt is our guilt, we justly deserve
it; Adam’s death is our death, we certainly receive it.
The Third
Rock, Death is Certainly a Punishment
Another
issue is resolved by the passage, “The fathers have eaten sour grapes and the
children’s teeth are set on edge ... The soul that sins; it shall die.” Clearly, death is a punishment; yet we must
return to this subject at a later date and give it more attention. Therefore, we are left with three immovable
rocks, and seemingly one more reason to reject opposing contemporary views: for
God
cannot be unjust; all mere men sin; nearly all die. The 100% statistic of death knows only three
exceptions thus far in history (Enoch, Moses, Elijah).
Christ
Moreover,
I cannot see Christ as being merely my corporate head. Christ is not just my president. He is that, to be sure, but He is much, much
more. The descriptive metaphors of
Scripture: head and body, bride and groom, foundation and building, speak of an
intimacy of relationship that reaches far beyond any corporate idea. The idea of corporate headship is simply
inadequate for the riches of Scripture.
“That they may be one (John 17).”
“Speak the same things.” “One
Lord, one faith, one baptism, One God.”
“One bread that we break, One cup that we drink.” These all speak of an organic, bodily unity
of great depth, a “body life” if you will.
Dissension
Some
Christians reject others, sometimes even bitterly, over these things. Many deny that there is any juridical aspect
to God at all. Some are even saying that
love defines God. On the other hand,
particularly conservative Christians, often overcook the juridical aspect of
God. To be sure, Jesus is as
Melchizedek, The King of Righteousness, but He is even more. The death of Christ on the cross does declare
me righteous; but it is also making me righteous; and it is healing the damage
done to my body and to creation as well.
Yet, the continual harping on the juridical aspect of God is offensive,
and has produced a bitter, knee-jerk reaction.
Why
Bother?
In
any case, I hope you see that I’m trying to thread the needle that will resolve
theological conflict, avoid the rocks of God’s immutable and perfect justice;
man’s inevitable sin; man’s nearly inescapable death, and yet warn you about
dangers ahead.
I
make no claim about being right. I only
hope for the complete reconciliation of the Church, that I’ve not
misrepresented Augustine, and that I’ve not misled you or your colleagues or
anyone in the Church in any way. I
cannot resolve the problem, I just don’t know how. Perhaps we should learn from the Gordian
Knot, or Occam’s Razor.
Pax
vobiscum. Your brother in Christ, “Even
so, come Lord Jesus.”
Herb aka Augie
Herb aka Augie
No comments:
Post a Comment