Council of orange and Original Sin

[orthedoxy]

Please explain this quote from the council of orange.
This is taken from reformed forum. http://www.christianforums.com/t1741600-council-of-orange-529-ad.html

Council of Orange - 529 A.D.


I found these very interesting. What are your thoughts upon them?

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. 6:126); and, "For whatever overcomes a man, to that he is enslaved" (2 Pet. 2:19).


Did the Church believe one Inherent the guilt of Adam at 529ad

[StChristopherofPalestine]

It doesn't look that way to me. It still says that we suffer the consequences.

[Orthosdoxa]

I don't see how this supports that idea.

[knee-v]

I realize that the Council of Orange was not one of the seven Ecumenical Councils, but did those canons represent the teachings of the entire Orthodox Church, or was it solely a western phenomenon?

[Marjorie]

Of course the soul was changed for the worse and its freedom was impaired as a result of Adam's sin; that is the Orthodox belief.

In IC XC,
Marjorie

[orthedoxy]

what about this part?
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).

[VickiY]

Apparantly from what I have read the main objectionable idea is that Pelagianism holds that we only received that physical consequences of Adam's disobedience, and that our souls remained untouched by it. As a result, according to Pelagians, mankind does not need Jesus as a means of salvation, but only as a good example, as our souls can tell the difference between good and evil without Divine grace. (not 100% sure on this, as I am not au courant with all the heresies.)

[StChristopherofPalestine]

what about this part?
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).

That still isn't saying we inherit the guilt of Adam's sin. I did not do the sin that day, but I suffer the consequences because it changed humanity and the world. The consequences of Adam's sin can be likened to a baby who gets an STD from the mother at birth. The baby did not do anything to get the disease, but it must suffer the consequences of the mother's sin.

I have a bad feeling that analogy has some huge flaw that I'm not seeing. Please correct me if it does.

[VickiY]

As to guilt of original sin, no, it does not imply that at all...but the mere consequences of a physical death are enough to change our souls. Mankind learned to rationalize things, for instance...

God: You worship Me, follow My Instructions with Faith, and I shall provide for you, as I do for those lillies over there in that field...you don't see THEM worrying, do you?


Man: Well, God said this, but I NOW NEED TO FEAR DEATH, so I must go against His Word, not because I want to, exactly, but it is a question of obeying God or letting the family starve, but I can just go off and till the fields all the time, or hunt, instead of worship, and THAT will see me provided for, not absolute trust in Him....what do lilies know, anyway...???

Or such similar "dialogue". Our own fears separate us by our nature from devoting ourselves COMPLETELY to God. In order to achieve Theosis, and draw closer to God, we must first master our own nature. Some of our greatest saints (such as the Desert Fathers) achieved this so well that they literally walked away from the safety and comfort of civilization, into the harshest environment they could find, in order to begin to trust God to provide for them.

Did that make sense?

[sin_vladimirov]

Borthers and sisters, do not tire yourselves in this regard,

Council of Orange was NEVER ACCEPTED by the East.
Thus it is not our bussines what some on it thought.

compare:
http://mb-soft.com/believe/txw/orthcoun.htm (http://mb-soft.com/believe/txw/orthcoun.htm)


Also, brother Orthedox, can you next time find council THAT IS ACCEPTED by our Church.:thumbsup:

Although, not a bad try, you almost confused me!^_^






" which is the death of the soul"


It sounded "a bit" weird so I checked.^_^

(Soul does not die, can not die or I am very mistaken!)