So I have been in dialog with a Eastern Catholic on Google+ for a couple weeks now discussing ORiginal Sin vs. Ancestral Sin. It took a while for him to understand the difference as most Orthodox use outdated resources to compare the two, focusing on the guilt that the RCC used to teach which no longer does. In the wake of the removal of this guilt from the Catechism they left this notion of some substance passed on through propagation, rather than simply a corruption of the image they still attach this extra substance in addition. after a few days we came to this conclusion the RCC holds that the humanity that Christ assumed was a prefall humanity. To my understanding of not only patristic Christology and Orthodox soteriology this is not an acceptable view. St Athanasius teaches that only that which is assumed could be healed, meaning if post fall humanity is what would need to be assumed in order to be healed, St Cyril also speaks that it is our very own nature that he must assume to heal and join it with His own in his Catechetical lecture. Im looking to make sure im correct in saying that we could not accept such a stance for the Incarnation... for those interested the bulk of the convo is found here https://plus.google/u/0/105467920974334811759/posts/RaucDggGoae
Posted on: Sat, 24 May 2014 21:22:17 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015