Originally posted by Nemesio
I'm so shamefully Occidental, it's not funny.
🙁
Thanks for the Oriental viewpoint. 🙂
Some quotes from a Orthodox writer, bearing on my thesis in the prior post, that I thought might interest you—
http://www.orlapubs.com/AR/OLD%20LTRS--LAT%20APLGT%20ETC/LT3.html
As Fr. John Meyendorff observed, the Orthodox speak simply of "Salvation." "Redemption" (based on a biblical metaphor) is rarely used; the other juridical terms, almost never.
Our emphasis on the Incarnation and the Resurrection (we certainly don't underestimate the Crucifixion either, but celebrate festivals in its honor, cross ourselves quite often, and have icons of the holy Cross everywhere) invokes being in the basic form of [divine] energies and emphasizes and depends on participation in Being.*
After all, it is nonsensical in our framework to say: God attributes (imputes) Adam's sins to you and me (and even the all-pure Theotokos); He then imputes these imputed sins of, say, an infant (or the all-pure Theotokos) back to Christ; and then Christ's "merits" are imputed to us--who all the time remain (as Luther said) "sinners" in ontological reality.**
* In Orthodoxy there is a longstanding differentiation between God’s essence and God’s energies;
charis (“grace” ) is related to these energies, and is not simply “gift.”
___________________________
** I would phrase this “reductio” somewhat differently—
(1) As a result of the “fall,” Adam acquired an ontological “sin nature.”
(2) This ontological sinfulness (and the guilt that merits just punishment) is inherited by all subsequent humans (via procreation?).
(3) This ontological sinfulness/guilt is assumed by Christ (2 Cor. 5:21) and destroyed (Rom. 6:6), or removed (Heb. 9:26); [see also John 1:29, Rom. 6:22, Rom. 8:2, and 2 Cor. 5:21].
(4) Humans still inherit and bear this ontological sinfulness/guilt.
__________________________
There are no NT (or OT) occurrences of the terms “original sin,” “sin nature,” or even “sinfulness.” To be sure, “sin” is often employed as a substantive noun. NT references that are used in support of the concept of ontological sinfulness seem to be almost entirely Pauline, particularly in Romans.
The basis of Orthodox soteriology seems to be that the sins of humanity are forgiven (
aphiemi: released, dismissed, cancelled), and salvation is now the process of allowing sanctification to come to fruition (sanctification/salvation is a process in Orthodoxy, not an event, perhaps like the process of healing after one has been injured). In Orthodoxy, the “fall” did not result in any ontological “sin nature,” since humanity did not lose its ontological nature as “image of God”—what was damaged was humanity’s “likeness” to God, that is, our ability to live a life of holiness. In this schema, the word “sin” takes on its original meaning as error or failure, and does not become strictly “transgression.” Again, Orthodox soteriology is about healing (
iaomai), rather than about being redeemed from the guilt of any ontologically inherited sinfulness.
I’ll have to leave it all at that, and let others argue it out as they will—I now have other things to do.
NOTE: The Greek word translated as salvation (
soterias) means to cure or make well, as well as to rescue or deliver. Orthodoxy clearly favors the former senses.