Evolution and Original Sin

"Made just by God, Man nevertheless from the outset of his history was persuaded by the Evil One to abuse his freedom, set himself up in opposition to God and seek his fulfilment elsewhere. What Revelation teaches, experience confirms: Man looking into his heart finds himself prone to evil and sunk in many evils which cannot come from his good Creator. Often he refuses to acknowledge God as his first beginning and disrupts the harmony which should govern his relations with God, with himself, with other men and with all created things."

Vatican II, Constitution on the Church in the Modern World.

"We believe that in Adam all have sinned. From this it follows that on account of the original offence committed by him human nature, which is common to all men, is reduced to that condition in which it must suffer the consequences of that fall. This condition is not the same as that of our first parents, for they were constituted in holiness and justice, and man had no experience of either evil or death. Consequently, fallen human nature is deprived of the economy of grace which it formerly enjoyed. It is wounded in its natural powers and subjected to the dominion of death which is transmitted to all men. It is in this sense that every man is born in sin.

"We believe that our Lord Jesus Christ redeemed us by the sacrifice of the Cross from original sin and from all those personal sins to which we confess, so that the truth of the Apostle's words is vindicated that where sin abounded, grace did more abound. "

Paul VI, Credo of the People of God, 1968

Nihil obstat: R.J. Cuming D.D. Censor

Imprimatur: Ralph Brown V.G. Westminster, 31VII77

The Nihil obstat and imprimatur are a declaration that a book or pamphlet is considered to be free from doctrinal or moral error. It is not implied that those who have granted the Nihil obstat and Imprimatur agree with the contents, opinions or statements expressed.

Evolution and Original Sin

Rev. Roger Nesbitt

MSc ACGI DIC

CONTENTS

I GENESIS 1 to 3: THE CHURCH'S TEACHING

II EVOLUTION AND THE CREATION OF MAN

III GOD, THE TRUE ENVIRONMENT OF MAN

IV MAN'S FALLEN CONDITION: ORIGINAL SIN

V RESTORATION THROUGH JESUS CHRIST

Evolution and Original Sin

The impact of new knowledge concerning the Evolution of living things has raised important questions about the major Christian doctrines of Creation and Original Sin. In particular, how are we to interpret the early chapters of the book of Genesis in the light of this new knowledge? What precisely does the Church teach concerning these chapters? This is the first question to be answered before proceeding to attempt a synthesis of the data of God's Revelation with that from the modern scientific perspective of the world. As Catholics we need have no fear of any basic contradiction since it is the same God who reveals His truth to us through His word in Scripture, interpreted by His Church, and who also reveals aspects of His creative plan through the human knowledge gained by scientific research into "the things that He has made". Part I outlines the main teaching of the Church about Evolution and Original Sin, in order to clear up some of the present confusion but also to clear the ground for an attempted synthesis of the data of Revelation and of Science in parts II to V.

I. GENESIS 1 to 3: THE CHURCH'S TEACHING

"Fundamentalism" and "Modernism"

How then are we to interpret these first three chapters of the Bible which relate to us the Creation of the world, of Man, and of Original Sin in Man? As Catholics we believe that the word of God in Scripture is not to be privately interpreted but it is the responsibility of that Living Teaching Authority which Christ as God gave to us in His Church. Concerning these chapters the Magisterium has steered a careful course between two extreme positions "Fundamentalism" and "Modernism".

"Fundamentalism" is the view that everything is to be taken completely literally that God created the world in six days and that it was carried out in precisely the way described in chapter one, day by day. In their zeal to preserve the Divine Inspiration of Scripture, the fundamentalists, whether Protestant or Catholic, feel that any concession to scientific knowledge will ultimately destroy the inerrancy of Scripture. A completely literal interpretation is all that they will admit. Clearly there are serious difficulties with this position. Reconciliation with the knowledge of Evolution and the completely different time scale discovered by Science become impossible. Further difficulties concern the text itself. Why is it for example that in Genesis chapter 1 Man is created only after the plants and animals, whilst in Genesis chapter 2 he is created before any plant of the field was yet in the earth?

"Modernism"   however   is   probably   far   more   widespread   and   influential   at   the   present   time   than "Fundamentalism". In order to accommodate the very real advances in scientific knowledge the modernist dissolves the sacred text to the point where it becomes no more than a "story", a convenient "myth" or legend with no basis in history.

Thus the Dutch Catechism: "These chapters do not ultimately intend to relate to actual historical facts".1

The Church defends both Scripture and Science

The  Church  in  her  official  teaching  has carefully  rejected  both  a  fundamentalist interpretation  which  denies  any credence to Science as well as a modernist interpretation which denies that the Scriptures are Divinely inspired. Pope Pius XII in his encyclical letter Humani Generis (1950) admitted that these early chapters were written in a "naive, symbolical way of talking, well suited to the understanding of a primitive people". But he also insisted that they do contain "certain important truths upon which the attainment of our eternal salvation depends". God taught a primitive people in primitive terms but He did teach them important historical truths which cannot be changed. The primitive yet striking cosmology of the book of Genesis is no more than the setting for the teaching of those truths.

Essential Truths of Genesis 13.

The Church then has insisted on the following central truths as basic to any correct interpretation: 2

1. God made all things from nothing, and all things made by God are good. (Lateran Council IV, Vatican Council I, Pope Paul VI's Credo of the People of God).

2. God is transcendent and really distinct from His creation. (Vatican I against all forms of pantheism)

3. Man is made in the "image and likeness of God", who is "Creator in each man of his spiritual and immortal soul" (Credo, also Lateran IV, Vatican I and II)

4. At the beginning of history Man abused his freedom and offended God. The state of Original Sin in which we share is a direct result of that sin which was real and historical at the origins of the race. (Lateran IV, The Council of Trent, Humani Generis, Vatican II, Credo)

5. "Original Sin is transmitted by propagation along with human nature and is therefore incurred in each person individually." (Credo, also Trent)

6. The main effects of Original Sin are threefold: "that fallen human nature is deprived of the economy of grace that it formerly enjoyed. It is wounded in its natural powers, and subjected to the dominion of death which is transmitted to all men. It is in this sense that every man is born in sin." (Credo, also Trent)

Creation through Evolution?

Are we free to believe and teach that God created the world through a process of Evolution? The answer given by Pius XII in Humani Generis (1950) and reiterated by Paul VI (1967)3 is: Yes. There is one important proviso that the human soul is not one energy with matter but is a special creation of God, and of a higher order.

In the book of Genesis itself, most scholars distinguish two separate accounts of the creation of man. The “Priestly" account (Genesis 1:1 to 2:4a) describes a stepwise progressive creation of the world by God in gradual phases, or days, teaching that on each day "God saw that it was good" and reaching its climax in the creation of Man, made in the image and likeness of God Himself and who is seen to be "very good". This account stresses the unity of Man with the rest of God’s creative action. It could be seen as harmonising with creation through Evolution in perspective if not in precise detail. On the other hand the more primitive account of Man's creation, the "Yahwist" account (Genesis 2:4b9) stresses that Man is also a direct creation of God Himself "The Lord God formed Man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and Man became a living being". To hold therefore that Man was the product both of matter in Evolution and the direct creation of God would seem to bring together the complementary aspects of Man's creation as described in Genesis.

Man: Spirit and Matter?

Are we committed to teaching a real distinction in Man between spirit and matter? The answer must be yes from the constant witness of the Councils of the Church (Lateran IV, Vatican I and II), and from the teaching of Pius XII and Paul VI.4 On reflection it is clear that to reduce Man to matter alone is not only to deny any possibility of life after death but also to deny any ultimate personal freedom or responsibility for sin.

Monogenism or Polygenism?

Are we to consider Adam and Eve individuals (Monogenism) or a group (Polygenism)? Here we need to be cautious in view of the caution of the Magisterium itself. Pius XII, in the only major pronouncement of the Magisterium, 5 rejected polygenism because he could not see how this could be reconciled with the doctrine that the whole human race have inherited the effects of Original Sin as taught so firmly by St Paul to the Romans: "As sin came into the world through one man . . . " (ch 5 vv. 1219). Presumably he meant that if there was a group then it would be possible for some of them not to sin, and thus their descendants would not inherit Original Sin. The doctrine of the universal fallen state of the race would therefore be seriously compromised.

A distinction here between "polygenism" and "polyphyletism" might be useful. If "polygenism" were to refer to the creation in one locality at the same time of say, 5 or 6 pairs within the same stem or phylum (equivalent to "monophyletism") then it would seem quite possible that if one or two sinned this would affect the rest so that they would sin also. The result would be that the whole race, as descendants of these pairs would pass on Original Sin and the doctrine would be safeguarded.

"Polyphyletism", on the other hand, would be the view that mankind was created in several different localities either at the same time or at different times so that the human race was created from many different evolutionary branches or phyla. Thus God may have created separate pairs for example in Persia, China, Indonesia etc. This would seem to be much more difficult to reconcile with the Church's doctrine since the possibility of sin in every single place is diminished. It would seem quite likely that one pair might not have sinned, and so for some of their descendants to be free from Original Sin. Again there would be a clash with the teaching of St. Paul, and with the need for all men to be reborn through baptism and the Holy Spirit.

Scientific Evidence for Monogenism?

The Church then at present teaches monogenism, one original human couple, and whilst polyphyletism would seem to be unacceptable a polygenistic monophyletism (several couples from one branch) could possibly be squared with Catholic doctrine. What can be said about the scientific evidence in this discussion? Whilst Pierre Teilhard de Chardin may not have been renowned for his doctrinal orthodoxy few would deny his perceptiveness in grasping modern scientific trends. De Chardin made two important points: firstly that the science of man seems to come out decisively in favour of monophyletism and secondly that any decision for or against monogenism must ultimately elude science in view of the depth of time that has elapsed since the creation of man.6 Because of this scientific inconclusiveness perhaps the Church's teaching on monogenism may turn out in the long run to be the only information we shall ever have.

Some interesting questions remain to be answered by science. Can any argument from genetics and biochemistry if not from anthropology be constructed for monogenism? Does not the complete interfertility and viability of the offspring between all the races of Man necessarily argue to one origin and biological stock for Homo Sapiens?

Despite all this the fact remains that our stock was damaged at the beginning of human history by a real sin, and the effects of this sin are passed on to us all. That is the teaching of the Church. At the present time she still favours monogenism and there is no need for an inferiority complex on this matter with regard to the scientific evidence.

Angels and the Fall

The existence of angels, pure spirits of intellect and will and creatures of God, is defined doctrine of the Church as taught at Lateran Council IV and Vatican Council I.7 This teaching has been reaffirmed by Pope Paul VI in his Credo of the People of God. It is also of course the constant witness of Scripture, Tradition and the Liturgy. The existence of the devil is also defined doctrine from Lateran Council IV. Satan, a fallen angel, is referred to on numerous occasions in the Scriptures and in the writings of the saints. The witness of doctors of the Church such as St John of the Cross and St Teresa should not be discounted, nor should the Church's practice of exorcism. It is interesting to note that Vatican II in its Constitution on the Church in the Modern World refers to the devil in connection with the sin of Adam and Eve, and reaffirms the traditional interpretation that the serpent in the book of Genesis represents Satan: "Made just by God, Man nevertheless from the outset of his history was persuaded by the Evil One to abuse his freedom, set himself up in opposition to God and seek his fulfilment elsewhere . . . . But the Lord Himself came to free and strengthen Man, inwardly renewing him, casting out the `prince of this world' (cf Jn 12:31) who had held him enslaved to sin." (para 13).

II. EVOLUTION AND THE CREATION OF MAN 8

The teaching of the Church is that Man is a special creation of God and that the human soul is not one energy with matter but of a higher order. The problem today is how to distinguish between matter and spirit in Man. What evidence is there to show that Man is not just matter? To answer this question some of the essential properties of matter must be drawn out from modern science. The question, "what is matter?" must be asked before the difference becomes clear. Two key aspects of matter have emerged in recent years they are environmental control and universal scientific law. In so far as Man will be seen clearly to diverge from these aspects we will have a vital clue to his unique nature.

Matter: Interdependence and Environmental Control

In the past, prior to the advent of modern science, things were seen very much as individual, separate realities trees, animals, stones etc. They were seen as largely independent of each other. But science has in fact revealed to us how very dependent upon each other things really are the immense and real interplay. A rabbit in a field for example lives and moves in a state of dynamic equilibrium through and with its environment. This consists of many factors: oxygen from the atmosphere, warmth from the sun, moisture and water, grass to eat, trees for shelter, the sounds and smells etc etc. The animal lives and moves and is in harmony with this total interplay of matter. It exists in a complex web of relationships with other living and nonliving things. If the rabbit were released onto the surface of the moon it would suffer instant death due to the totally unsuitable environment.

But the environment of the rabbit itself is also relative and dependent. Each blade of grass has its own various needs, such as salts in the soil, the light and warmth from the sun, the moisture, carbon dioxide etc. In this way the plant and animal kingdoms are completely interdependent upon each other and these two great kingdoms of living things are also closely interrelated with the nonliving world. The overall amounts of nitrogen, oxygen and carbon dioxide for example depend upon the total animal and plant populations of our planet. On a larger scale the precise harmony and balance of the earth around the sun are important factors affecting the environment, together with the equilibrium of our own solar system with the other galaxies.

Matter: Ruled by the Universal Scientific Law of Control and Direction

Open any textbook of science, whether physics, chemistry or biology and you will soon stumble upon the concept of scientific law. Without the idea of definite law, the science of chemistry for example would cease to exist. Definite reactions give definite products. If, on one occasion, hydrogen and oxygen burned to give water, on another occasion, carbon dioxide, on another hydrogen sulphide, all operating by `chance', then chemistry as we know it as an exact science would be quite impossible.

All the separate sciences with their various laws are seen to overlap into each other physics into chemistry into biology into biophysics, biochemistry and physical chemistry. Each relationship or equation in each science is seen through modern knowledge to be no more than one partial aspect of one overall equation of matter, one UnityLaw of Control and Direction, embracing the whole Universe of matter from electrons to galaxies, from amoeba to monkeys.

Without God as the Supreme Intellect and Author of the UnityLaw of course this whole process would be quite impossible.9 But the main point at this stage is that each material substance whether it is something simple and undeveloped like a hydrogen atom or whether it is something highly complex, evolved over billions of years like a cow in a field, have this one characteristic they are all controlled and directed by the environment of matter, living and nonliving. Each substance slots into its `ecological niche' and is tied to it. A fox or a rabbit may be very mobile but it is still essentially a slave of its surrounding environment. Any animal below man cannot escape the constant cycle of nature with  its  highly  complex  and  programmed  scientific  deterministic  law.  In  this  sense  anything,  living  or  nonliving constituted only through matter, is certainly without freedom.

Are there `souls' in Animals and Plants?

There is no evidence to suggest from science that any of the plants and animals have `vital principles' or `souls' over and above the purely material order. They too are ruled by scientific law and environmental control. The laws of physics and chemistry fully apply, albeit in a more complex way, to the living things. The viruses are a good example of a class of substance that have the characteristics of both the living and the nonliving. It would seem that there is a difference in philosophy only of degree and of complexity between the living and the nonliving. Although plants and animals are highly complex and magnificent creatures they are not free or intelligent but basically computerlike in operation, and they remain programmed by their environment. If evolution is correct then there is no need to invoke the direct intervention of God to create living matter. The plants and animals have emerged from the simpler forms of matter through the upward ascent of the evolutionary process, according to the UnityLaw of God embodied in the vast equation of Nature. It seems that there is need here to correct certain aspects of the teaching of the medieval philosophers concerning the `souls' of plants and animals in the light of additional knowledge gained from modern science. All the evidence suggests that we should hold a complete materialism regarding everything below mankind, a materialism which nonetheless requires the Mind of God for its very existence and harmony.

To  hold  to  such  a  materialism  however  gives  us  no  charter  for  the  wanton  destruction  of  the  material environment or for cruelty to animals. It must never be forgotten that all of these material creatures come from God.

They all share in varying degrees, according to their place in the tree of life, in the goodness, beauty and being of their Creator. They do so in a finite way, the higher entities such as the animals do so in a higher manner than those lower down the evolutionary process. Genesis teaches that everything made by God before the creation of Man is essentially `good'. Such a belief should lead to great reverence for the whole finite material creation, reflecting a great reverence for its Infinite Creator.

How then does Man differ from Matter?

Will Man fit into this idea of matter ruled by scientific law and environmental control? Few would deny that Man is partly matter, nor that the laws of matter certainly apply to him in a detailed way, as in the science of medicine. But is this enough to explain him? Is he just an overdeveloped ape? Is he ruled solely by the scientific laws of Nature as they apply to living matter below him? The answer must be: no. The coat is too small to fit, like trying to squeeze a schoolboy's blazer onto an adult. Physics, chemistry, biology on their own are hopelessly inadequate at explaining the totality that is Man. His culture, his abstract thought, his art, science, technology, his philosophy, and his religion are just not reducible to exact scientific laws and equations.

In the first place Man is not a slave of his environment of matter. He can break free from this control. The proof is to be seen in his transformation of this planet with its landscaping, agriculture, vast cities and roads. Could rabbits reach the moon or escape from the constant cycle of nature? The answer is clearly: no. But man can and constantly does so. He has freewill and self-control, not control by material environment. Here it is not a question of degree, but of a completely new quality entirely missing from the living and nonliving things below him.

The second way man differs from the animals is in his power to understand the harmony of the world and to deduce the laws of science. He can stand outside of the flow of matter, outside of space and time. This gives him the ability to penetrate the mysteries of the material world and to plan the future in terms of the present. Man has a `Godlike' power over the planet, and over the rest of the universe also. Technological man of the 20th century has fulfilled the prophecy of Genesis:

"So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him~ male and female He created them. And God blessed them, and God said to them, `Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it~ and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth' " (Gen 1:2728).

With this power of understanding, this intellect, man can create his own environment. On trips to the moon he takes the air needed for breathing, the food, and all the apparatus needed to resist an otherwise completely hostile environment. Even the higher animals do not have intelligence in this way at all. What `intelligence' they have can be explained in terms of their highly developed and sensitive computerlike powers of instinct, nonetheless limited in range and always dependent on their surrounding ecology.

The Soul: a principle of freewill and intellect

Because of these twin powers of freedom and intelligence, which are not material, nor intelligible through scientific law then there must be within each man a principle of freewill and intellect, which is nonmaterial, outside of space and time, yet embodied within it. This spiritual principle, which makes man to be man, and without which he would be meaningless, is called the soul.

How much is matter, and how much is spirit?

In Man therefore spirit is that which controls and directs matter from within. Matter in Man is that which is controlled and directed. The soul in Man takes over and carries out the function of the environment below Man. Animals are seen to be controlled and guided from without by the external environment. The times and the seasons, the harmony of their own habitat is their law of life. Man however is his own law. He is controlled and directed from within by an interior spiritual principle, the soul. Only this can explain his "dominion over every living thing that moves upon the earth".

Could the soul emerge from matter?

A common alternative view is provided by "animists" who hold that everything that exists contains some form of "soul" or "anima" as well as a material body. On their view man contains simply a more highly developed soul in parallel with his more highly developed body. Teilhard de Chardin has sometimes been called an animist but on his view every particle of matter contains a spiritual and a material energy. He goes further and thoroughly blurs the real distinction between them by saying that there is in fact only one energy with a spiritual and a material face. (He is therefore a "monist" in philosophical terms).10

What can be made of these opinions? Their big difficulty must be in drawing a line, if any, between those entities which have spiritual souls and those which do not. The common sense view must be to draw a clear line based on scientific evidence between man and other animals. If the souls in men and animals are similar, why do even the higher animals not show even the most simple intelligence and freedom from environmental control? One finds it difficult to  envisage  rabbits  making  it  to  the  moon,  or  even  constructing  submarines,  let  alone  studying  even  simple mathematics! One would expect a graduation of intelligence and freedom. We do not find it. If the spiritual in Man has "emerged" from matter through evolution then these "spiritual" powers must be predicted to exist in some degree up and down the evolutionary process. Are we to believe that plants as well as animals, amoeba and simple organisms, and even primitive molecules and atoms have a "spiritual life"?

The hardheaded evidence of the sciences makes nonsense of the animist and Teilhardian perspectives on matter below Man. Neither is the materialist right to deny the overwhelming evidence for the spiritual in Man. In the end it must be said that the human soul cannot emerge from matter even in its most complex forms. Matter is not free and not intelligent. Freedom and intelligence cannot emerge from what is not free and not intelligent.

Conclusion: Man is a special creation

Since the soul cannot be educed from matter through Evolution, it must therefore be a personal creation of God Himself at the peak of the process. This fits with the facts concerning Man since he is nonmaterial or spiritual, `Godlike' in his free and intellectual dominion over the planet and made in the direct image and likeness of his Creator. What the Church teaches is also the conclusion of experience, reason, common sense and the scientific evidence.11

How then was Man created?

The whole evolutionary development of matter from the `big bang' of fundamental particles upward was to produce the supreme mutation', the supreme arrangement of matter at the climax of the tree of life. At the top of the tree the brains became larger and larger and more specialised in function. Below Man the brain size was just correct to control and direct the other organs. Thus a fly's brain is much smaller than an ape's. But in both cases the brain size is just sufficient to ensure that the organism is an harmonious unity both internally but also with its environment. If a small part of the brain of either is removed then chaos results.

At the highest level of Evolution the range of matter was developed to its extreme limit. The highest animals would have had the ability to move about widely in the environment, to use their hands and their feet in a highly specialised way, even perhaps to use tools in a primitive sense. Despite this development however they would still be bound by their environment, and tied to the cycle of nature. That is, they would still be matter but at the highest point of its development. Finally the supreme mutation was produced with a larger brain than previously, containing all of the brain of the highest ape, but more. At this point in the evolutionary process matter has done its main work under God. It now looks to God for further determination, for further developments of being. It must look beyond matter to a higher order for control and direction. At this point Man is created by God infusing the soul into the supreme mutation. In Man, matter is taken over by the soul which now controls and directs it to a destiny beyond the environment of matter and the cycle of nature.

The soul a biological necessity

The key to Man is therefore to be found in his brain, but not in the sense understood by the materialists. In fact on purely materialistic principles there is a certain biological contradiction in Man. With his larger brain he should be a diseased sport of nature. If he were matter alone he would either destroy himself against his environment or be destroyed by it. That Man is not a diseased sport of Nature is due to the controlling presence of the soul, which is also therefore a biological necessity. It is not an arbitrary addition. The soul can only operate through this specific genetic mutation. It would be nonsense to talk of God arbitrarily infusing a soul into another organism such as, for example, a cat. Only when  the  whole  vast evolutionary  process  has  laid the  very  precise  and  careful `foundations'  can  the  supreme `keystone' of the soul be `inserted'. Nothing in the plan of God can be abrupt or arbitrary. Everything in His Infinite Wisdom has its precise and highly accurate place and function.

Man: the fulfilment of Evolution

The evolutionary process up to Man therefore is not broken. It is a fulfilment and it is also continuous. A serious objection often voiced against the Christian Faith is that the beautiful pattern of Evolution is abruptly broken by the creation of Man. It can clearly be shown that is not so. Indeed it can be shown that without the creation of Man the whole development would seem to be meaningless. There is indeed no break or `intervention'. Man is the direct creation of God through the spiritual soul, only at the climax of the evolutionary process. This is the whole point of the plan and its logical fulfilment. Man is the product both of matter through evolution and the direct action of God, as one total unity and wisdom. Because of this, material Evolution has a higher meaning and purpose. Matter, through Man, now enters into a completely new order of existence and being, for which it had been prepared over billions of years. Ultimately matter is taken up into the order of the spiritual. It is the destiny of Man, matter and spirit, which must now concern us.12

III. GOD, THE TRUE ENVIRONMENT OF MAN

Man, intelligent and free, stands at the climax of God's creation through Evolution. What is his destiny? What will be his law of life? Where will he find control and direction? He will seek wisdom and love to satisfy his mind and heart.

Is Man's destiny in matter?

Below Man, the animals seek and find control and direction in their environment of matter, their food and drink, and their law of life. But Man is more than matter. What is spiritual and personal could not be controlled and directed by matter alone. It would be totally inadequate. It is fixed by law~ he is free. It is impersonal~ he is personal. Jesus Christ expressed this basic truth when He said that: "Man does not live by bread alone" (Mt 4:4).

Is Society and human friendship enough?

Will Man's thirst for love and truth be satisfied by a union with other persons in society, as some brands of humanism suggest? Certainly Man's nature is social and any destiny to which he is called must indeed be a social destiny in which the love of his fellowmen is an essential part since we are "members one of each other". Nonetheless the love of the neighbour will never be enough. In the very nature of things no matter how deep and spiritual a friendship may be, it is impossible for another person to penetrate into the deepest regions of the soul. There are depths in each of us that remain hidden and incommunicable to our neighbour. At the best a friend's ability to fulfil another is severely limited, and at the worst they let you down all too frequently! Man's thirst for an absolute Truth and Love cannot be satisfied by his neighbour alone.

Is Man an orphan in creation?

A man will seek to know the ultimate reasons for the world, why he is here and where he is going. He will seek a love which will fulfil his deepest desire to possess and to be possessed in the deepest regions of his spirit. Who is to provide him with this bread of life in the wilderness of the material world? By looking at things around him Man will know with certainty about God as the personal and supreme Being upon whom all things depend. He must look up to God his Creator for wisdom and love, for control and direction to fulfilment:

"Like the deer that yearns for running streams, so my soul is yearning for you, my God.

My soul is thirsting for God, the God of my life." (Psalm 41)

"Thou hast made us for thyself, O Lord, and our hearts are restless till they rest in thee." (St. Augustine)

God, the Environer of Man: the life of grace

If God is Infinite Wisdom then Man will not be an anticlimax in creation, nor will he be an orphan. God will indeed provide for us the guidance and the love we need and which will not be found within created things whether below us or equal to us. The Unity Law of control and direction will now operate on a higher level than the purely material since Man is more than matter. He is personal and spiritual, so his Environment will be personal and spiritual. If it cannot be created then it must be Divine. God Himself must be the Environer or true Environment of Man to play upon his spirit directly with the touch of His divine grace, to give the soul a deep divine love and an absolutely certain truth so that: "In Him we live and move and have our being" (Acts 17:28).

Even as the plants require sun and warmth to grow and develop so the spirit of a man, and his whole being, needs God to grow and deepen in perfection. Plants without sun die and shrivel up. But for the living presence of God, Man would be frustrated beyond measure, in a state of meaninglessness.13

God will not give to Man the fullness at the beginning, although the life of grace will begin with the first moment of the creation of Man. Under the mighty UnityLaw of control and direction God will not only create Man Himself as the fulfilment  of  Evolution  but  He  will  also  provide  that  Environment  necessary  for  Man's  growth,  development  and wellbeing. Like the grain of mustard seed the action of God upon Man will grow and develop in an upward ascent from primitive beginnings through deeper and more profound communication or revelation. The Bible records this progressive growth of the plan of God in His dealings with mankind. We see this plan unfold over thousands of years from our first parents through the history of His own chosen people Israel until the fullness of time has come when "the Word is made flesh", "the fullness of the Godhead in bodily form", comes amongst us, "full of grace and truth".14

In Our Lord Jesus Christ, True God and True Man, our thirst and hunger are finally and completely satisfied: "Whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst~ the water that I shall give him will become in him a spring of water welling up to eternal life." (John 4:14)

"This is the Bread which came down from Heaven~ not such as the fathers ate and died~ he who eats this Bread will live forever". (John 6:58)

Man is not then an orphan in creation. In God he will find a living harmony, which will bring joy and peace and fulfilment. This living harmony of Man with his God is an essential part of the plan of God. Experience however teaches us that this has been tragically shattered. Original Sin, and the Fallen state of mankind, is a fact not only of the book of Genesis but also of human experience . . . . .

IV. MAN'S FALLEN CONDITION: ORIGINAL SIN

Original Sin a fact of human nature

"Modern masters of science are much impressed with the need of beginning all enquiry with a fact. The ancient masters of religion were equally impressed with that necessity. They began with the fact of sin a fact as practical as potatoes. Certain new theologians dispute Original Sin, which is the only part of Christian theology which can really be proved". Thus wrote G. K. Chesterton in Orthodoxy in 1908.15 Very modern and relevant! He goes on: "To our fathers this very fact which was to them and is to me as plain as a pikestaff, is the very fact that has been specially diluted or denied".

What did he mean by Original Sin being a plain fact? Simply that there is a basic contradiction in Man that is a fact of experience. There is a lack of that expected balance, wisdom and harmony which even the animals below him possess. Man has great intellectual and spiritual powers, he is the climax of God's creation yet morally he is often selfish, decadent and depraved.

For example, it is a given observation that animals do not share our excesses in matters of eating and drinking, or in matters of sex. To the animal sex is a mechanism used solely in the "mating season" for procreation out of that season there is a remarkable reluctance to bother with sex at all. With some animals it is indeed almost impossible to get them to mate outside their native environment witness the "low sexual drive" of the pandas at the London zoo! Compare this with the irrational and absurd obsession with sexual pleasure in modern human society seen in the lurid posters of Oxford Street cinemas and the pornographic bookshops, and then you begin to realise that we are what has been described as a race of "nuclear giants and moral pygmies".

In other words there is a gap between what we should be and what we are in reality. It is therefore a fundamental intuition that we are a fallen race. This basic flaw has been described by a modern writer~ speaking of the predicament of this century: "Technologically, where it is of comparatively minor importance, we refuse to take a retrogressive step. Culturally, morally, socially and in terms of our ideals, we betray a suicidal tendency to do so, and if we continue in our present course the gap between our technological potency and our ethical impotency will widen into a vast unbridgeable chasm. The ultimate results of such an attitude involve the total destruction of self and all society including everything that has been thought, fashioned and striven for by man".16

Here then is the starting point for any outline of the doctrine and catechesis of Original Sin the discord, disharmony, moral disorder within the very nature of each of us. The twentieth century is no more immune from this disorder than previous ages, with the difference possibly that due to modern discoveries there are greater possibilities of evil, as well as for good. The century that has produced the brilliance of an Einstein and that has made it to the Moon, has also produced the depravity of Auschwitz, Buchenwald, Hiroshima and the vast destruction of the abortion centres. It is also the century of widespread mental disease, and of war and pollution on a large scale. The original cause may seem remote to modern man but its effects are plain for all to see.

Cardinal Newman has vividly described this fallen state of mankind:

"Starting then with the being of a God (which, as I have said is as certain to me as the certainty of my own existence...) I look out of myself into the world of men, and there I see a sight which fills me with unspeakable distress.

The world seems simply to give the lie to that great truth, of which my whole being is so full~ and the effect upon me is, in consequence, as a matter of necessity, as confusing as if it denied that I am in existence myself. If I looked into a mirror, and did not see my face, I should have the sort of feeling which actually comes upon me, when I look into this living busy world, and see no reflection of its Creator. This is, to me, one of the great difficulties of this absolutely primary truth, to which I referred just now. Were it not for this voice, speaking so clearly in my conscience and my heart, I should be an atheist, or a pantheist, or a polytheist when I looked into the world .... the sight of the world is nothing else than the prophet's scroll, full of `lamentations, and mourning and woe'...

"...To consider the world of man in its length and breadth, its various history, the greatness and littleness of man, his farreaching aims, his short duration... the disappointments of life, the defeat of good, the success of evil, physical pain, mental anguish, the prevalence and intensity of sin, the pervading idolatries, the corruptions, the dreary hopeless irreligion, that condition of the whole race, so fearfully yet so exactly described in the Apostle's words, `having no hope and without God in this world' all this is a vision to dizzy and appal~ and inflicts upon the mind the sense of a profound mystery, which is absolutely beyond human solution.

"What shall be said to this heartpiercing reasonbewildering fact? I can only answer, that either there is no Creator, or this living society of men is in a true sense discarded from His presence. Did I see a boy of good make and mind, with the tokens on him of a refined nature, cast upon the world without provision, unable to say whence he came, his birthplace or his family connections, I should conclude that there was some mystery connected with his history, and that he was one, of whom from one cause or another, his parents were ashamed. Thus only should I be able to account for the contrast between the promise and the condition of his being. And so I argue about the world~ if there be a God, since there is a God, the human race is implicated in some terrible aboriginal calamity. It is out of joint with the purposes of its Creator. This is a fact, a fact as true as the fact of its existence~ and thus the doctrine of what is theologically called Original Sin becomes to me almost as certain as that the world exists, and as the existence of God."17

St. John reminds us that, "if we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us" (1 John 1:8) and the Second Vatican Council emphasised this fact of man's fallen state in its document on The Church in the Modern World: "What Revelation teaches, experience confirms: Man looking into his heart finds himself prone to evil and sunk in many evils which cannot come from his good Creator. Often he refuses to acknowledge God as his first beginning and disrupts the harmony which should govern his relations with God, with himself, with other men, and with all created things." (para 13)

The Harmony before Sin

How are we to explain this fact of experience, this fallen state of the human condition? In part III an attempt was made to show that the relationship between Man and God at the beginning would have been one of dynamic harmony between Divine Grace and human nature. Since all creation is essentially good there would have been no evil at the beginning and our first parents would have been in a state of peace and tranquillity deriving from their right ordering and communion with their Creator, "walking with God in the cool of the day".

This harmony would have been similar to that between the animals and their environment of matter. But it would have been infinitely higher in order, and primarily spiritual and with obvious repercussions of joy, peace and harmony upon the physical in man. God Himself would have been the living and loving Environment of Adam and Eve. He would have been their dynamic `Law of life.'

We can get some glimpse of what this state was like from those souls who, even though they are members of a fallen race, really do live spiritually in great harmony with God. The writings of St. John of the Cross give us some glimpse of the highest stages of the mystical life when the soul is almost in perfect union with God and the effects of the Fall are at a minimum.

The book of Genesis clearly emphasises that before their sin, our first parents lived in a world that was essentially good, and in their case very good. The evil effects in mankind are not therefore to be located in the inbuilt limitations or imperfections of matter itself, as many modern theologians hold and teach.

It is here that the orthodox Catholic perspective upon Original Sin differs so radically. The constant witness and teaching of the Church in her official doctrine has always been that the disorder in Man is ultimately due to a REAL SIN committed at the beginning of human history by our first parents. It is not due to the evil in matter, nor the imperfections of Evolution, nor to the fact that mankind was culturally primitive, but it is the sole responsibility of Man. In their pride many modern humanists, whether Christians or not, cannot bring themselves to admit that this could be so.

The shattering of this harmony by sin

Suppose a teenage son deliberately and consciously disobeys the wise guidance and express command of his parents, drives their car without permission and with no experience at great speed, crashes and gets hurt. The "sin" committed was the ultimate cause of the bodily damage. The son deliberately broke his harmonious relationship with his parents by his disobedience. In doing so he suffered the consequences of that act. Furthermore even when family love is restored and medical treatment applied, and despite spiritual sorrow and reconciliation, sadly he will be scarred for life and the bodily damage will remain.

So too with our first parents at the beginning of history. The repercussions of their sin of disobedience in rejecting the wisdom of God would cause damage within their own nature. In Man, matter sought all its good, as material, from the soul, its natural principle of control and direction. The soul sought and received all of its good from God personally teaching it, guiding it, and loving it. The deliberate resistance of the soul to God, to its good and true would have terrible effects on the body itself and on the bodysoul relationship, since Man is one person.

Thus the rejection of God's wisdom by the intellect of Man would be transmitted also to the material body directly against the harmony, the natural bent of living matter. The body would be denied its proper good by the soul.

The result would be that the body would continue to disobey the soul, and the "flesh will lust against the spirit". This is the great civil war that goes on within each of us. It is given the technical name of "concupiscence", and its origin was ultimately in the first disorientation of the soul from God. Only Man could introduce this element of damage since only he, unlike everything else in Evolution before him, has the freedom to do so.

St. Thomas Aquinas argues that our first parents must have been created in a state of grace with God since the harmony within Man is dependent upon his union with the living God:

"Was Man created in grace?

"That Man was actually set up in grace seems to be required by the very rightness in which God made Man for his first state. For this rightness was a matter of the reason being submissive to God, the lower parts to the reason, the body to the soul.

"Now the first obedience was the cause of the second and third, since as long as the reason remained obedient to God it was itself given the submission of the lower elements... If the loss of grace dissolves the obedience of the flesh to the soul, it was the presence of grace in the soul which gained it the submissiveness of the lower parts."18

The previous harmony was indeed shattered by Man's sin at the origins, with its consequent loss of grace. This is  the  teaching  of  Revelation. When  examined  carefully  it would  seem  to  be  the  only reasonable and coherent explanation for the fallen state of mankind. Matter cannot sin, and to say that God could create Man with an inbuilt tendency to evil is also a contradiction. The only alternative rational explanation for the fallen state of our race is that it must have been caused by a real sin at the origins. The Biblical explanation makes sense of the date of experience.19

Teilhard de Chardin and the "new catechetics"

Many of the proponents of the so called "new catechetics" and "new theology" do not like to use the precise expression "Original Sin" but they prefer the more ambiguous title "sin of the world". What exactly they mean by this is never very clear or precise. Since many of them follow the teaching of Teilhard de Chardin, then "the sin of the world" would seem to be no more than the inherent limitations of matter in Evolution. Here they are caught in a logical trap of their own making since where there is matter then there must also be "the sin of the world" or Original Sin. The origins of "the sin of the world" must logically be placed well before the creation of Man. This is exactly what Teilhard de Chardin says. It is worth quoting the passage in full. It occurs under the heading "Original Sin, a General Condition of History". He writes:

"Taken in the widest and most fundamental sense of the word, death (that is disintegration) begins in truth to become apparent as early as the atom. Being built into the very physicochemical nature of matter, all it does is to express in its own way the structural atomicity of the universe. It is impossible, therefore to escape from the `mortal' (and in consequence from the influence or domain of original sin) without escaping from the world itself. Located and tracked down in nature by its specific effect, death, original sin cannot therefore be assigned to any particular place or time. What it does is to affect and infect the whole of space and time. If there is an original sin in the world, it can only be and have been everywhere in it and always, from the earliest nebulae to be formed as far as the most distant."20

According to Teilhard then, every single particle of matter, even well before the advent of mankind is infected with Original Sin! Are we really to believe that hydrogen atoms, stars, planets, bacteria, fishes, dogs, elephants as well as men are affected? Books, buildings, cars all these are made up of atoms so these too are presumably not free from Original Sin! Wherever there is death or "disintegration" there you have Original Sin, says Teilhard. But some atoms are fairly inert and have probably never changed or disintegrated since their creation. Are these free of Original Sin? He insists that it is not "an isolated fact" but "a general condition of the whole of history". It is very difficult to see how this view can be squared with the teaching of Revelation.

How is Teilhard to explain the fact that God, who is Supreme and Infinite Goodness can desire and create a universe from the beginning infected through "the whole of space and time" with "sin"? If the first atoms are not responsible for the evil, then God must be.

In the end the Teilhardian perspective owes nothing either to science or to Religion, but finds its origins solely in his own poetic and philosophical mind. This outlook reduces the doctrine of Original Sin to no more than the created limitations of matter, to what he calls "the universal presence of disorder". Most people would probably take the next logical step and cease to call "the universal presence of disorder" Original Sin. They would simply deny the doctrine! In this way they escape from reality, from the definite facts of human experience and the precise definitions of the Church.

Granted that there is a need for a new synthesis between the evolutionary and the scientific view of the world and the orthodox doctrine of the Church, it may well be that the absence of just such a synthesis has made the Teilhardian one so attractive. It might be said that the "devil" of Teilhard has filled the vacuum. Nevertheless it is no solution to accept his unorthodox synthesis since it respects neither the facts of science nor of Revelation. In the end it makes nonsense of both.21

"The sin which dwells within me"

The special discord or imbalance in human nature, ultimately denied by the Teilhardians and humanists, is often called "Concupiscence". It might be defined as "disordered desire". It does not mean a desire natural to man, nor exclusively sexual desire, but a desire not amenable to control by the wisdom of the soul. Thus we will often desire to overeat at meal times. It is certainly not wrong to eat, nor to desire to eat. This desire, with its concomitant pleasure, has been given to us by God for a definite function to nourish the body. But the disordered craving of gluttony, with its desire of experiencing the pleasure of eating, as an end in itself, divorced from its primary purpose would be an example of concupiscence at work.

St. Paul often refers to this disordered tendency to evil. It is one of the most vivid effects of original sin:

"For I know that nothing good dwells within me, that is in my flesh. I can will what is right, but I cannot do it. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I do. Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I that do it, but sin which dwells within me." (Romans 7:1820)

Besides the example of eating, obviously sexual behaviour provides further evidence of the power of concupiscence in human nature. The loss not only of the "sense of sin" in general but the "softpedalling" of the doctrine of original sin may have been a powerful factor responsible for the questioning of the traditional sexual ethics of the Church in recent years. It is no good pretending that human nature is in an ideal or perfect state. The concupiscence of our fallen condition also causes a degree of chaos and lack of control over our sexual powers. Some movements of the flesh will be good and legitimate, others against the wisdom of God and the soul will be simply due to "sin dwelling within me". Along these lines will be found some basis for the distinction between genuine love and lust.

So it is that some desires of the flesh are almost "pseudonatural" in our fallen state. These can be freely self indulged by the soul through for example pornography or constant sexual abuse and a man becomes gripped by the "vice" of lust. Modern permissive morality tends to enslave us by creating an addiction to our evil tendencies thus persuading us to foster and indulge our concupiscence. The alternative is that by self-denial under the grace of God our Environer the spirit can strengthen its hold over the body by the practice of virtue. The "lustful" elements can be cut back or ignored. The "old man of sin" is crucified and the "new man created in Christ Jesus" flourishes. This doctrine of the weakness of the flesh is important in the pastoral understanding of the Church's moral teaching. It means that we must, whilst fully upholding the law of God, have considerable sympathy with our neighbour's struggle and be slow to condemn.

The need for Purgatory

In the works of St. John of the Cross we read of the immense damage that has been done to man at almost every level of his being by the Fall.22 Since man is one person then besides the weakness of the flesh there are interrelated disorders in the spiritual part of man a darkening of the intellect, and a weakening of the will. The effects of the Fall in terms of an inbuilt selfishness reach into the deepest regions of the human soul, conscious and unconscious. There is a need to restore the balance. That is why we must pass through what St. John and other mystics call "the dark nights of sense and spirit" corresponding to the purification of the sensual and the spiritual parts of man. The play of God's grace upon the soul can cause great pain in restoring it to union with Him. If this process is not completed in this life, and in most of us of course it is not, then it must be carried out in the next life. There is a need for purification, for Purgatory, before we can see God face to face since nothing stained or disordered can come before Him.

We can get some glimpse of the pains of purgatory in this life. Classic examples are the drug addict and the alcoholic who go through "purgatory" in the giving up of drugs or drink. This pain in the denial of the disordered craving is very near to the suffering of purgatory, although St. John of the Cross tells us that such pain cannot compare with that of the dark night of the spirit when the deepest regions, the most profound powers of the soul, the intellect and the will, are being purified.

The doctrine of purgatory then is not arbitrary. It makes sense when the doctrine of the Fall and the wound in Man, with its tendency to evil and its disorientation from God, is accepted.

A Fallen Race: Social and Ecological Disorders

Two further effects of Original Sin must be briefly mentioned as they have been magnified greatly in this century, namely the social impact of evil and the poisoning of the material environment.

The inbuilt disorder in each individual descendant of Adam and Eve, causing loss of harmony with God and between body and soul, has inevitably led to a further sickness and disease in the body social, in the collectivity, in the community of nations. As the power of technology and communication has brought the race closer together in this century so it becomes clearer that the unity of the race is fragile and seriously damaged we are indeed a fallen and divided race. One can easily list many of these social evils: discord within marriage and the family~ the widespread destruction of the lives of the unborn by abortion and of whole races by euthanasia~ fierce rationalism with international war and racial hatred~ persecution and tension between Church and State reflecting those tensions in man between soul and body~ industrial, economic and political unrest~ extremes of poverty and wealth~ great agricultural knowledge yet widespread famine~ medical knowledge yet widespread psychological disease and drug addiction~ the corruption of power through torture, lies and the abuse of the mass media~ the obsession with violence and sex~ the wholesale diffusion of a spirit of moral decadence and human pride etc. etc. In the words of Vatican II in its document on The Church in the Modern World: "It cannot be denied that often men are diverted from doing good and driven to evil by the social environment in which they are immersed from infancy. Disturbances frequent in the social order are certainly traceable in part to tensions in the economic, political and social structures. But at bottom they are the result of the selfishness and pride of man vices which pervert even the social environment. Where good order is affected by the consequences of sin, Man, who is born with a certain inclination to evil, finds new incitements to sin which he cannot overcome except with strenuous efforts helped by grace." (para 25)

This continual social greed and selfishness of the twentieth century has also led to what is called "the ecology crisis". The dominion of a race, now fallen, "over every living thing on the earth" has reached proportions that may eventually threaten our very existence on the planet. We are exploiting the resources of the earth at an alarming rate and carelessly poisoning the seas and the air we breathe "God's Creation, yet Man's pollution". God did intend us to develop the material and biological resources of the plant. It was an essential part of His plan that we should "increase and multiply and fill the earth", but not to poison and destroy. We need not in any way accept the whole of the "ecodoomsters" message, but nonetheless our age has highlighted this further disorder of man within his material environment. It is an additional and expected effect of our sinful and selfish state.

"The wages of sin is death"

The separation of soul and body by death is the final evil inflicted upon us by the Fall. The Bible clearly links death with Original Sin:

"God did not make death, and He does not delight, in the death of the living for God created man for incorruption, and made him in the image of His own eternity, but through the devil's envy death entered the world..." (Wisdom 1:13, 2324).

"Sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned ....many died through that one man's trespass... death reigned through that one man..." (Romans 5:12, 15,17)

This teaching would seem to agree with human reason and philosophy. Why should God create Man as a close unity of soul and body, two corelated principles dependent upon each other, and then allow this terrible divorce between them? Vatican II expounds the mystery of human death and its link with sin:

"The enigma of the human condition becomes greatest when we contemplate death. Man suffers not only from pain or the slow breaking down of his body, but also from the terror of perpetual extinction. It is a sound instinct that makes him recoil and revolt at the thought of this total destruction, of being snuffed out. He is more than matter, and the seed of eternity he bears within him rebels against death. All technical undertakings, however valuable, are powerless to allay man's anxiety~ prolonging his span of life here cannot satisfy the desire for a future life inescapably rooted in him.

"While all imagination fails us in the face of death, the Church appeals to Revelation in telling man he is created by God for blessedness beyond the wretchedness of this life. The Christian faith teaches that bodily death, from which man would have been delivered had he not sinned, will yet be conquered because the almighty and merciful Saviour will give back to man the salvation he lost through his own fault". (Church in the Modern World, 18)

How is Original Sin transmitted?

Matter is not free. It automatically follows definite and precise laws. It will obey the soul, its principle of control and direction, even when directed away from its true good. Thus a source of radical disorder at the origins of the race would "muddy the waters" and we would expect the whole human stock to be damaged.

The explanation given by St. Thomas Aquinas would seem to be the only rational one available.23

He taught that the fallen state was passed on through the material element. Today we would say that it was passed on by genetic inheritance taking that term in its widest sense. It must be admitted that this position cannot yet be proved or disproved by scientific evidence but it must be a conclusion reached from the sheer logic of the situation itself. (Although it is of course known that genetic damages are transmitted causing medical disorders). The main reason given is that it would be impossible for Original Sin to derive from God personally as Creator of each human soul since God cannot in any way be the direct source of evil. If it does not come from God then it must be transmitted by the genetic material provided by the parents.

How could this come about? Take the example of a seal impressed on wax. If the wax is slightly impure or stained then the whole image or impression will be slightly disordered or stained no matter how perfect the seal which impressed it. Similarly when God creates new life He does so through matter passed on from damaged stock. The soul comes pure from God but it is infused into matter carrying the inherited disorder.

In this way each person created inherits a wound in his very nature, derived ultimately from our first parents and aggravated by sins which followed upon this first one. This imperfection involves a tendency to evil and thus a disorientation from God. This is the state of original sin in which all of us are born. It does not come from the world around us, but it inheres in each of us individually and personally from the first moment of our conception in the womb. We are each of us members of a fallen race. The only exceptions were Jesus Christ and His Mother.24

Other  current  theological  views  also  seem  very  difficult  to  reconcile  with  this  teaching  and  that  of  the Magisterium of the Church. The views of Peter de Rosa are typical of this school of thought. In his book Christ and Original Sin he gave currency to ideas which may well be termed the "new Pelagianism". Pelagius (early 5th century) held that Original Sin was transmitted by imitation only and that man was not affected intrinsically by the Fall. In view of this the Council of Trent and also Pope Paul VI in his Credo of the People of God emphasise that it is transmitted "along with human nature, not by imitation but by propagation, and is therefore incurred by each individually". Hence it is in all men and proper to each. De Rosa's view, which is also that of the Dutch Catechism, locates Original Sin in the community as a whole and not in the individual as such. Naturally he acknowledges his debt to the works of Teilhard de Chardin. When a child comes into contact with the "sinful community", "the sin of the world", then he contracts Original Sin. De Rosa holds that because of this we do not need to worry too much about infant baptism since babies who die before baptism would "die out of Original Sin which is no longer looked at in the simple fashion of a `stain' to be washed away. They have contributed nothing to the sin of the world".25 But this ultimately reduces Original Sin to something purely extrinsic to man. It is difficult to see how it can be squared with the teaching of the Church. It is precisely because of the individual inheritance of the Fall that Pope Paul teaches: "Baptism is also to be given to infants, who cannot as yet be guilty of any personal sin, in order that, though born deprived of supernatural grace, they may be reborn of water and the Holy Spirit to divine life in Christ Jesus". (Credo of the People of God)

V. RESTORATION THROUGH JESUS CHRIST

For St Paul the whole of creation, living and nonliving, had to be seen in the light of Jesus Christ:

"He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation~ for in Him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible . . . all things were created through Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him  all  things  hold  together. He  is  the  beginning, the  firstborn  from  the  dead, that in  everything  He might be preeminent. For in Him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through Him to reconcile to Himself all things, whether on earth or in Heaven, making peace by the blood on His Cross." (Col. 1:1520).

This Christocentric perspective upon the Evolution of the Universe is one which we need to preach and to "update" in the light of new knowledge from the sciences, enabling us to see the fulfilment and perfection of the plan of God, human and divine. The Evolution of matter leads upwards to life, climaxing in Man, created in God's image and likeness. Man seeks his control and direction not in matter or created things but in God, that is in Jesus Christ, who is God made Man. It follows from sheer logic that the whole Universe from atoms and amoeba to men and to angels must be centred around and upon Jesus Christ through the mighty UnityLaw of Control and Direction. It might be put this way:

"Without Christ, Man is meaningless, without Man, the Evolution of Life is meaningless, without Life, the earth is meaningless, but all things have meaning in Jesus Christ, to whom all things, visible and invisible, are relative, and through whom all things bear witness in their being."

In the Scotist view of the Incarnation accepted in this pamphlet, Christ would have come as Saviour even apart from Original Sin to complete and bring to fulfilment God's work of creation. But given the tragedy of sin, both original and personal, now He comes also as our Redeemer. The bitterness of Gethsemane and Calvary now bear witness to God's Infinite Love for fallen mankind in the Heart of Christ. His divine Truth and Wisdom now shine out from His Sacred Head tragically crowned with thorns.

In this pamphlet only a brief outline can be given of how the wound of Original Sin is healed and repaired. Any exposition of the darkness of sin would be incomplete without mentioning the light of Christ Crucified and Risen shining in this darkness. We also see in this redemption the staggering power and wisdom of God in reconciling a fallen world to Himself. If the final meaning of Creation through Evolution is only to be found in Jesus Christ as Saviour, the ONLY ANSWER to the damage caused by Original Sin will be through Jesus Christ as Redeemer.26

St Thomas Aquinas sums up in one simple paragraph how the wound of sin and its effects are transmitted and how these effects are healed and forgiven:

"Original Sin spread in this way, that at first the person infected the nature and afterwards the nature infected the person. Whereas Christ in reverse order at first repairs what regards the person, and afterwards will simultaneously repair what pertains to the nature of all men. Consequently by baptism, He takes away from man forthwith the guilt of Original Sin and the punishment of being deprived of the heavenly vision. But the penalties of the present life . . . pertain to the nature from which they arise. Therefore these defects will not be taken away until the ultimate restoration of nature through the glorious resurrection." 27

So when Adam sinned it affected his nature, which is now fallen. We inherit this fallen nature which infects our person, soul and body. The healing grace of God in Christ starts at baptism, but the evil effects of a fallen human nature still remain despite our reconciliation with God. Concupiscence and death must still be overcome. The healing process is not completed until death is finally conquered by the resurrection of the body, and our fallen nature is finally restored to complete perfection.

The natural progression for this redemption of the human person should be from the womb to the font for baptism, and then onwards later to the altar and to the sacraments and teaching of the Church, especially the Blessed Sacrament of God, the Bread of Life, Christ in Person. This healing and strengthening grace of God is at work in us all the time. The effects of this grace are to strengthen the control and direction of the spirit over the flesh in Man, to purify and to quench the evil tendencies of concupiscence. For our part we need to cooperate with Christ acting through His Church. Hence the necessity of prayer and penance at all times, since "the spirit is willing but the flesh is weak".

St Paul expounds the tragedy of sin and the triumph of Christ in his letter to the Romans~

"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 . . . But the free gift is not like the trespass. For if many died through one man's trespass, much more have the grace of God and the free gift in the grace of that one man Jesus Christ abounded for many...

"Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? We were buried therefore with Him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have been united with Him in a death like His, we shall certainly be united with Him in a resurrection like His. We know that our old self was crucified with Him so that the sinful body might be destroyed, and we might no longer be enslaved to sin . . . so you also must consider yourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus" (Romans 5:12, 15~ 6:36, 11).

IN SUMMARY: What is lost in Adam is Restored and Forgiven in Jesus Christ.

ORIGINAL SIN

/

REDEMPTION THROUGH JESUS CHRIST

1. The Separation from God caused by the pride and disobedience of our first parents

Man is reunited with God through the GodMan Jesus Christ, and in the perfect obedience of His Crucifixion and Death.

God's work of redemption and reunion in Christ starts with Baptism when we become "dead to sin and alive to God". It continues in the Eucharistic Sacrifice of the Body and Blood of Christ, and the other sacraments.

2. The Wounded Human Nature:

a) the darkened Intellect

This is enlightened by the Divine Truth and Infallible Teaching of Christ and His Church.

b) the weakened Will

This is strengthened by the Divine and human love of Christ.

c) Concupiscence

This is quenched through the Grace of Christ given in Holy Communion and through prayer and penance and by Purgatory, either in this life ("the dark nights of sense and spirit"), or in the next life.

3. The Social Disorder of Mankind

The evil social effects and lack of harmony begin to be overcome by the reunion of all men in the Family of God, the Mystical Body of Christ, the Church on earth. It is completed in the next life in the "Communion of Saints".

4. The Disorder between Man and his material environment.

This is corrected through the unselfish and wise stewardship by Man under God of the material and biological world according to the moral and social natural law taught by Christ and His Church, so that "Christ may be all in all".

5. The Separation of Soul and Body through Death.

This is the last effect to be destroyed. The Bodily Resurrection of Christ from the dead conquers death. It is applied to us in the resurrection of the body at the end of time and life everlasting.

"Dying you destroyed our death, Rising you restored our life, Lord Jesus, Come in glory."

Notes.

1A New Catechism. (Burns and Oates, 1969), p.40.

2The main sources for the teaching of the Magisterium on these chapters are: Lateran Council IV, (1215), Profession of Faith, ch. 1. (D.S. 800)~ Council of Trent, (1546), Decree on Original Sin, (D.S. 15115)~ Vatican Council I, (1870), Dogmatic Constitution on the Catholic Faith, ch.1. (D.S. 30012, 30215)~ Pope Pius XII, Encyclical Letter Humani Generis, (1950), (CTS pamphlet Do 265)~ Pope Paul VI, Credo of the People of God, (1968), (CTS pamphlet Do 410)~ See also General Catechetical Directory, (1971), para 51.

3Cf. Pope Paul Vl, Address to theologians and scientists taking part in a Symposium on Original Sin, (11th July 1967).

4Besides the references also given in 2 and 3 see also: Vatican 11, Pastoral Constitution on The Church in the Modern World, n.14, 29.

5Humani Generis, para 37.

6P. Teilhard de Chardin, Christianity and Evolution, (Collins, 1971), p.20910.

7Cf. Cardinal John Wright, The Angels of God, (Faith Pamphlets, 1974).

8The Main ideas contained in the following sections are to be found in Fr. Edward Holloway's Catholicism: A New Synthesis, Foreword by Cardinal Wright, (FaithKeyway Publications, 1976). The reader is strongly urged to read the relevant chapters of Catholicism: A New Synthesis referred to throughout this pamphlet for a fuller treatment of these themes.

9Cf Catholicism: A New Synthesis, ch. 4. "Creation through Evolution"~ Roger Nesbitt, Evolution and the Existence of God, (CTS pamphlet R167, 1971)

10Cf. P. Teilhard de Chardin, The Phenomenon of Man, (Collins, 1959), P.634.

11Catholicism: A New Synthesis, ch.6 "Mind and the Universe", ch.7 "The Ascent of Life".

12Catholicism: A New Synthesis, ch. 8 "Brain and Personality: The Secret of Man", ch. 9 "Spirit, Law and Life".

13Catholicism: A New Synthesis, ch. 10 "God as 'Environment'".

14Catholicism: A New Synthesis, ch. 11 "The Evocation of the Word", ch. 12 "Messiah and UnityLaw", ch. 14 "The Word Incarnate".

15G.K. Chesterton, Orthodoxy, (Collins Fontana ed.), p.15.

16Duncan Williams, Trousered Apes, (Churchill, 1971), p.90.

17Cardinal John Henry Newman, Apologia Pro Vita Sua, (Everyman's ed.) p.2178.

18Summa Theologiae, I, q.95, a. 1.

19Catholicism: A New Synthesis, ch.13 "Original Sin and Moral Evil".

20P. Teilhard de Chardin, Christianity and Evolution, P.189

21Catholicism: A New Synthesis, ch.5 "Concerning Teilhard de Chardin".

22For example see: Ascent of Mount Carmel, Bk.I, ch.XV.

23Summa Theologiae, III, q.81, a.1.

24Cf. Roger Nesbitt, Mary, the Mother of God, (Faith Pamphlets, 1975).

25Peter de Rosa, Christ and Original Sin, (Geoffrey Chapman, 1967), p.133.

26Catholicism: A New Synthesis, ch.16 "Saviour and Redeemer", ch.17 "The Chalice which my Father has given me".

27Summa Theologiae, III, q.69, a.3.

www.faith.org.uk