4

I was looking up some stuff and noticed that multiple sources claim that the Catholics and Orthodox have a different view on the "first sin" or "original sin".

  • There is this answered question within the exchange. Which is what I've found through research as well.

  • As the Catechism says, “original sin is called ‘sin’ only in an analogical sense: it is a sin ‘contracted’ and not ‘committed’—a state and not an act” (CCC 404).

  • The Council of Carthage (418) is considered Ecumenical by the Orthodox Church, and it contained the doctrine of "Original Sin"... so no issue here.

  • Instead of original sin, which is used in Western Christianity, the Orthodox Church uses the term ancestral sin to describe the effect of Adam’s sin on mankind. We do this to make one key distinction; we didn’t sin in Adam (as the Latin mistranslation of Romans 5:12 implies). Rather we sin because Adam’s sin made us capable of doing so. The Greek word for sin, amartema, refers to an individual act, indicating that Adam and Eve alone assume full responsibility for the sin in the Garden of Eden. The Orthodox Church never speaks of Adam and Eve passing guilt on to their descendants, as did Augustine. Instead, each person bears the guilt of his or her own sins. (Saint John the evangelist orthodox church )

  • The OCA website claims the "West" understand the doctrine of Original guilt. It is possible they meant the protestants and not the Catholics, but in my experience the Western Church is usually the catholics.

  • There is the OrthoCuban website who provides a summary, but perhaps it is just the authors flawed understanding of the words used?


As the two churches appear to be still maintaining that there is a difference between Original Sin and Ancestral/First Sin... what exactly is the difference? Because as far as I can tell, there seems to be no difference. Both the catholics and orthodox churches say we suffer the consequences of the first sin, not the guilt.

I think the difference is that the Catholic Church defines sin as a violation, and for the Orthodox sin is the separation from God.

Is that the issue?

8
  • Very good researched question. The Council of Carthage you are referring to, is it this one (419) or this one (418)? There were a lot of councils/synods at Carthage, some attended by St. Augustine too, who in the West was responsible for the doctrine of Original Sin ! Commented Aug 27 at 14:02
  • The one where they refuted pelagius. It should be the 418 one if I'm not mistaken. The wikipedia article you linked claims it was the 418 one.
    – Wyrsa
    Commented Aug 27 at 14:19
  • I've seen some Catholic catechism wording about baptism removing the "guilt" of original sin. Perhaps that's the beginning of the difference? Commented Aug 28 at 13:36
  • In Catholic theology, the guilt of original sin is imputable to the unbaptized person. If the Orthodox are saying that there is no imputability of original sin to the person, then that would explain the disagreement. An unbaptized person who is not guilty of any personal sins is not guaranteed salvation in Catholic theology, whereas a baptized person not guilty of any personal sins is.
    – jaredad7
    Commented Aug 28 at 18:56
  • @jaredad7 christianity.stackexchange.com/questions/100203/… my answer here should clear that up. The unborn and unguilty, even if they were unbaptised are not separated from God. They never had the chance to become separated.
    – Wyrsa
    Commented Aug 29 at 11:01

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .