Most denominations have retained the basic framework of Augustine's thought. The Protestant reformation absorbed it through Luther who began as an Augustinian monk and kept the worst of Augustine. So did Calvin, who preserved the idea of absolute predestination. Both theologians reaffirmed the Catholic doctrine that Original Sin is tied to sexuality and lust.
Calvin's beliefs led to the kind of Puritanism described in Nathanial Hawthorn's Scarlet Letter. In this novel a woman who bears a child as the result of an adulterous affair is ostracized and condemned to wear a red "A" on her chest. her sexual indiscretion was seen as a blaring reminder of man's original wickedness.
Popular Catholic theologian Andrew Greely defines Original Sin as a "badly flawed" genetic nature or " root predisposition" that leads to sin. He tells us we suffer not so much for the sins of Adam as for those of the whole human race. Children are conditioned to sin by "parental behavior and the cultural influences of the society in which children are born." The human race is "critically defective", he argues. But his explanation fails to account for children who suffer before they have been conditioned to sin.
Protestant theologians John Dillenberger and Claude Welch tell us that sin is " a distortion and perversion which exists at the center of the self...Sin is opposite of faith,...the placing of ultimate trust in anything less than God." Their explanation, too, fails to explain why innocent children suffer.
Some Lutherans believe we are inherently sinful and that (except through Christ) we cannot escape from sin, which is with us from the moment we are conceived. And other Protestants believe sin stems from "lack of fear and trust and love of God", or standing in "opposition to God."
The official Catholic position harks back to Augustine's idea about the Fall. "The whole of human history is marked by the original fault freely committed by our first parents," the latest Catholic catechism tells us. The Church still says that human "misery" and "inclination toward evil" are transmitted to us as a result of "Adam's sin."
Orthodoxy has not thrown out the dirty bathwater of Augustine's theology. They are still saying that every baby born is mired in original sin and cursed by a twisted nature to suffer at the capricious hands of fate.
I reject that psuedo-theology. It isn't scriptural, logical, healthy, productive, sane. I prefer what the original Christians believed, what Origen of Alexandria believed, and what the Eastern religions assert, i.e., that Man's soul was created by God , the same essence in effect-- just as every drop of water contains the essential nature of the whole ocean --, that we have a spark of divinity within us, and the capabilities of acting and living in a manner God would be pleased with. Augustine's pseudo-theology, his insideous doctrine of Original Sin, denies us these attributes. We are just "miserable sinners" without the capability of living a good life (because we are simply sinners by nature). It denies our souls are part of the One, that our essential nature is pure and divine.
BTW, the main reason Augustine's scheme seems so far-fetched is that it hinges on the idea that sin was transmitted from one couple, Adam and Eve, to billions of innocent descendants (like a seminal venereal disease). But in Origen's world view, *YOU* are Adam and Eve. Each one of us once existed in higher states of being, enjoying divine union, Origen says, and each of us made the choice at some moment to leave that state and to "fall" into bodies.
msg num 13371 phillipdavid --July 30, 1997
marshame,
Yes, "psuedo-theology" is meant to be provacative. I posted a long diatribe ( Prt1=13261, 13263, 13268-71; Prt II=13285-87; Prt III= 13291-93) on Augustine's "theology", replete with footnotes, attempting to show that:
1) it is utterly incoherent
2) it is not based soundly on scripture
3) it was adopted in large part because it was a politically useful
doctrine to the Church, emporer and secular rulers
seasailor has tried to say that it must be true if the Church Councils adopted it. I have said this is not necessarily true. I have explained why the councils adopted it, and the reason had very little to do with scripture or even with interpretation of scripture.
As to why haven't humanity showed evidence of the divine spark -- I think many have. But, the masses have been indoctrinated with a false message that denies the divine spark. Instead they have been taught that they are miserable sinners with no power or capability of being anything else. Is it unreasonable to expect people to behave otherwise then? No. People have manifested what has held sway in their inner paradigms. That is why I characterized Augustine's ideas as counter productive and insideous.
If you get out of bed every day believing that you will have a bad day, guess what, you will have a bad day! The macrocosm mirrors the microcosm , and humanity has mirrored the insideous teachings it has been spoon fed for ages.
13373. phillipdavid - July 30, 1997 - 9:33 PM PST
marshame,
more to Message #13371,
Our divine spark, or latent divinity, is like a seed. A seed
can remain dormant for hundreds of years. But when it is
nurtured by light and water it begins to grow and
blossom. The real unfoldement of man is to be found in
the implanted divine seed. And the seed is the seed of
Christ within us all. Every son of God has that divine seed
implanted within him at the moment he is created.
Support for this idea is found in Genesis: "Let us make
man in our image, after our likeness." (1:26) The divine
image is the seed of divinity within our hearts. If you think
of yourself as having a divine seed inside, then you will
realize that at any time you can exercise the option to
pursue and develop your godhead as Jesus did. Then you
can realize that which has always been your true inner
God-manifestation.
Mystics have described this as returning to the state of
primordial bliss that we knew before we ever made the
choice to be separate from God. The question may be
rightly asked, "If we are Gods and Goddesses, how have
we made such a mess of the world?"
Ralph Waldo Emerson answered that question by
describing man as "a god in ruins." His vivid image
accounts for both the human frailties that hinder us and
the spark that gives us divine potential. If we look at our
lives as a process of reconstructing our God Self (Jesus
and Paul give specific instructions for this, as do many
other mystics, East and West), then we can claim to be
gods in the making rather than gods in ruins.
And how does a god in the making act? They have
learned to maintain an awareness of God while engaged
in all the mundane tasks of the day. Like sculptors, they
are moulding their souls after the pattern of the indwelling
God. This metaphor comes from the Neoplatanist
philosopher Plotinus, who advised, "Never cease
chiseling your statue until...you have become this perfect
work,...wholly tru
13374. phillipdavid - July 30, 1997 - 9:34 PM PST
This metaphor comes from the Neoplatanist philosopher
Plotinus, who advised, "Never cease chiseling your statue
until...you have become this perfect work,...wholly true to
your essential nature."
Paul spoke of Christ being "formed" in us. Greek
philosophers relied on the pursuit of knowledge. Early
Christian saints practiced asceticism and sought divine
visions. Hindus have used mantras, mudras and a variety
of breathing techniques, yogic postures and rituals. More
modern Christian scholars and mystics believed the key
was "the reformed intellect and will" as well as sharing in
"the infinite love of the Divine." Mystics in every religion
have outlined ways to achieve union with God. I stand
with those who believe it is possible (and I believe this is
the message of the Bible) and not with those who believe
in Augustine's theory of Original Sin and all its implications.