CatholicPlanet.Net discussion group  

Go Back   CatholicPlanet.Net discussion group > Catholic Continuing Education > Teaching Series - dogmatic theology
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 7th May 2007, 11:56 AM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,592
Default TS 6b: the Council of Orange

The Council of Orange was held in the early sixth century A.D. The Council was called in part to respond to theological errors on the topics of original sin, freewill, and grace. The Council of Orange established several important ideas about original sin, as follows.

CANON 1. If anyone denies that it is the whole man, that is, both body and soul, that was “changed for the worse” through the offense of Adam's sin, but believes that the freedom of the soul remains unimpaired and that only the body is subject to corruption, he is deceived by the error of Pelagius and contradicts the scripture which says, “The soul that sins shall die” (Ezek. 18:20); and, “Do you not know that if you yield yourselves to anyone as obedient slaves, you are the slaves of the one whom you obey?” (Rom. 6:16); and, “For whatever overcomes a man, to that he is enslaved” (2 Pet. 2:19).

This first Canon condemns the idea that only the body is affected by original sin. This Canon teaches that both body and soul are adversely affected by original sin.

CANON 2. If anyone asserts that Adam's sin affected him alone and not his descendants also, or at least if he declares that it is only the death of the body which is the punishment for sin, and not also that sin, which is the death of the soul, passed through one man to the whole human race, he does injustice to God and contradicts the Apostle, who says, “Therefore as sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned” (Rom. 5:12).

This second Canon condemns the idea that original sin only affected Adam and Eve, and also condemns the idea that only the negative consequences of the body (not also of the soul) were passed on to their descendents. This Canon teaches that the negative consequences of original sin, in body and soul, affect Adam and Eve, and all their descendents, that is, the human race. The Immaculate Conception preserved the Virgin Mary (and, in effect, Jesus Christ) from original sin, but all other human persons, descendents of Adam and Eve, are affected by original sin.


Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 7th May 2007, 01:28 PM
Joan
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pelagian heresy

Please explain how this heresy would have impacted the practice of Faith? For example, would it lead to a form of Pharisaical adherence to rules governing physical matters, such as diet for example; and ignore serious spiritual faults, such as envy or covetousness? In general, isn't it true that the same heresies, such as gnosticism, arianism, pelagianism, keep coming back in different terms?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 7th May 2007, 02:10 PM
Ron Conte Ron Conte is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,592
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joan View Post
Please explain how this heresy would have impacted the practice of Faith? For example, would it lead to a form of Pharisaical adherence to rules governing physical matters, such as diet for example; and ignore serious spiritual faults, such as envy or covetousness? In general, isn't it true that the same heresies, such as gnosticism, arianism, pelagianism, keep coming back in different terms?

Yes, people continue to repeat the same errors in different forms.

If Adam's fall was not inherited, then we would not need Baptism. One heresy is to claim that everyone is conceived, or born, with sanctifying grace, as if Adam and Eve's fall had no consequences for us.

If Adam's fall did not effect our bodies, then all of our desires would then be interpreted (incorrectly) as 'natural' and good. This is an error seen in modern society: anything that a person interprets as natural or as coming from his own tendencies is called good, even when the Church teaches it is sin.

Without the Fall from grace, there would be no explanation as to why there is so much sin and suffering in the world.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 7th May 2007, 05:15 PM
Climacus Areopagite Climacus Areopagite is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,433
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ron Conte View Post
Yes, people continue to repeat the same errors in different forms.

If Adam's fall was not inherited, then we would not need Baptism. One heresy is to claim that everyone is conceived, or born, with sanctifying grace, as if Adam and Eve's fall had no consequences for us.

If Adam's fall did not effect our bodies, then all of our desires would then be interpreted (incorrectly) as 'natural' and good. This is an error seen in modern society: anything that a person interprets as natural or as coming from his own tendencies is called good, even when the Church teaches it is sin.

Without the Fall from grace, there would be no explanation as to why there is so much sin and suffering in the world.

Amen to that. I am intrigued by an idea that a Saint once expressed. I think it was Saint Gregory Nazienzen? It is a little off topice but he said something like there would be no such thing as art if it were not for the Fall. A very interesting statement indeed. Imagine no Shakespeare, no Mozart, no Michelangelo, no Chopin. Good God I cant even imagine it.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.