A Further Word on Original Sin

Bishop Irenei of London & Western Europe (ROCOR)
Pt.1 on Original Sin - • Are We Born Guilty of ...
Purchase NEW BOOK "Enduring Love: Laying Christian Foundations for Marriage" at your preferred bookseller:
Amazon: www.amazon.com/Enduring-Love-Christian-Foundations-Marriage/dp/1735011657
Barnes & Noble: www.barnesandnoble.com/w/enduring-love-josiah-trenham/1144547044?ean=9781735011653#
Support Our Ministry
To make a tax-deductible donation, text “PNP” to 53-555.
Explore merchandise at patristic-nectar.mybigcommerce.com.
Visit / @patristicnectarkids for Patristic Nectar Kids content.
Newest Lecture Series: "The Holy Trinity" by Fr. Thomas Hopko
Explore the lecture series for free here. The series covers various topics related to the Holy Trinity.
Lecture Titles:
Jesus and the One God
How Does Jesus Relate to God?
Who Do People Say That I Am? (Part 1)
Who Do People Say That I Am? (Part 2)
Understanding Our Being in Regards to the Holy Trinity.
The Trinity and the Filioque.
Human Life in Imitation of God.
Recapitulation.
Living the Divine Life in This World.
If You Want to Be Saved.
Iconography Regarding the Trinity.
Connect with Patristic Nectar
Website: www.PatristicNectar.org
Instagram: bit.ly/3kmupqE
Facebook: bit.ly/33Bzmpx
Twitter: bit.ly/3igrH4f
Support Patristic Nectar
Spread the Word: Share content with family and friends.
Make a Donation: patristicnectar.org/donations.
Pray For Us: Include Patristic Nectar in your prayers for strength, help, and divine guidance.
Hashtags:
#orthodoxchristianity #jesus #christianity #patristicnectarpublications #patristicnectar #frjosiahtrenham #josiahtrenham #orthodoxchristianity #orthodoxchristian #christianity #church #jesus #jesuschrist #god #shorts #salvation #youtubeshorts #ytshorts #priest #ministry #pastor #identity #internet #christianity #churchfathers #saints #conscience

[@PatristicNectarFilms]

Link to Pt. 1 about Original Sin here or in description: kzbin.info/www/bejne/bZ68eJKYeL-FbM0si=x3oT3BfxWFnun-lQ

[@joseonwalking8666]

Thank you Vladka Irenei. This should clear up any confusions.

[@ILOVECOMEDYHAHA]

Christ is King! ☦️

[@hellie_el]

❤❤❤ thank you, your grace. i do so hope you will continue making these videos.

[@NavelOrangeGazer]

Thank you for this Valdyka ☦️

[@justian1772]

Honestly this is one of the best explanations of the topic I've ever heard. I'm blown away.

[@plantnovice]

This is a great video! In my experience, understanding the “why” behind an expression makes clear what a person(s) is trying to express. What this makes clear is that God does not create anything flawed. Once you have that presupposition, you understand why the church would say sin is not a corruption of nature but a disease. If I am understanding correctly, that is… this is what I’ve pieced together from Fr. Turbo and this video.

[@HuwRaphael]

Vladyka, thank you for this video! Connecting the idea that God creates each person with this discussion on original sin is a huge shift.

[@IsawCHRIST]

Greetings to all orthodoxy ☦️♥️

[@sooperdt]

Thanks for the follow up father, very clarifying

[@justian1772]

What a great example of how to respond to questions! I know from experience that this is not the norm with many other Bishops. God bless you, Vladyka!

[@Orthodoxi]

It is a wonder that what makes us fall, our Lord verily raises us up through. If we but chose to follow His Shepherds. Glory to God! Christ is Risen!

[@abrahamkassis3138]

Whats a pleasant interview to watch! Thank you both for that God bless you.

[@johanhofstedt7317]

Thank you Father. I understand better now. (looking to join Orthodoxy)

[@luketolson9829]

Thank you father

[@bradhernandez2699]

first time coming across this channel, immensely helpful with the assisted translation of these teachings, thank you.

[@deekay2680]

Christos Anesti! Beautifully stated!

[@mosescosme8629]

I am so thankful for the clarification. I will admit that the phrase mentioned did cause me some confusion, and I was afraid that you had taught some error. But with this explanation, I can confidently say I agree :) Natures cannot change; and we are born in sin. Amen.

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

Video in summary: human nature as an essence/substance is born pure as Adam, while human nature as in tropos (the way that a particular human essence wills) is altered and fallen since the original sin.

[@marincusman9303]

Essences don’t will..?

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

@@marincusman9303 animate, sentient essences/substances have a will and energy, 6th council is very clear on this point.

[@marincusman9303]

@@OrthodoxChristianTheology essences don’t do the willing though, the person does. Calling an essence sentient is odd to me

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

@@marincusman9303 humans are sebtinent beings ... Humans will...read the sixth council

[@OrthodoxChristianTheology]

@@marincusman9303 by the way hypostases willing is a heresy. if will derived from hypostasis God would have three wills

[@makingsmokesince76]

Thank you for this thoughtful word your Eminence. It might also be helpful to elaborate on the differences between our theology and that of the west in another video: in particular our understanding of the Nature-Person-Operations distinction? I recollect the Nature-Person distinction being very helpful in discerning, clarifying and understanding the Orthodox “position” on this question at the time of my leaving Protestantism for the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. Not conflating the person’s gnomic will with that of our human nature to will, helps with easing the sense of paradox. It also underlines just how disastrous seemingly harmless innovations in theology can be. I suspect that collapsing Person/Hypostasis into Nature/Essence is what could fool one into thinking that man has a “sin nature” from birth. Thanks again your Eminence. Christ is risen!

[@NoeticInsight]

It’s absurd that there was even any outrage to begin with. It’s a great concern that so many people attack the Bishop and accused him of heresy when he preached one of the most basic tenets of Orthodox Theology.

[@St_Augustines_Cry8]

You mean Augustine right?

[@pepejimenez9295]

Amen lord

[@nathancurtis9779]

Thank you Your Eminence, this is very helpful.

[@gonzalodelavega6646]

Christos Anesti!

[@nuns8126]

A book which explained the Orthodox church teaching on this topic is SURPRISED BY CHRIST by Father Arnold Bernstein. This book cleared up the understanding for me. Even though God creates our souls pure & sinless, He certainly allows a lot of bodies & brains to be born with biological & psychological defects such as cerebral palsy, retardation, Muscular dystrophy, schizophrenia, bipolar depression, diabetes, polio, heart defects, scoliosis, & 300 other diseases & inherited/genetic disorders. But is the volition willful choice or unchoice (such as manslaughter) that we can repent of. Our reality is that we live in a world where evil is everywhere. After Adam's sin the world did change & it affects us all the time as crime, violence, corruption, decay, malfiance.

[@GDI_LLC]

Where do I send a letter addressed to His Grace?

[@spreadinglutheranpropaganda]

A genuine question that I have as a Lutheran looking into orthodoxy: does not this teaching lead to the conclusion that sin is something that's outside of people, not in them? I would imagine that kind of teaching would have all kinds of weird implications such as having to escape the world etc. Could someone shed light on this issue?

[@joseonwalking8666]

Persons sin not natures. It is that simple. If you need this expanded let me know.

[@spreadinglutheranpropaganda]

@@joseonwalking8666 thanks for the explanation, i have a follow-up question tho: why was there a need for Christ to redeem the human nature if it isn't sinful?

[@joseonwalking8666]

@spreadinglutheranpropaganda human nature does not have a will. Persons do. For Orthodoxy our nature's have still be corrupted so that it can be influenced externally by the corrupted cosmos. For us the human nature is still good but due to human weakness and a darkened nous we sin. But it is us who are sinning. Christ incarnated (even if Adam and eve had nit sinned we hold he always intended on incarnating) to take on human nature and begin the process of healing humanities fallen nature. The other purpose that we focus on (not exhaustive list) is to defeat death by death. Upon his resurrection freeing the souls locked in hades.

[@joseonwalking8666]

@@spreadinglutheranpropaganda my last response died 😢

[@orthodoxwitness2374]

The answer, my friend, is that everything said in this video is the kind of Neo-Palagian sophistry that became popular in the 20th century due to Romanides and Meyendorff. Before this time, Everyone in the Church knew the Church's teaching that we affirm Augustinian Original Sin. We affirm that Adam's Sin is in us, and that it required remission. Without this teaching, Christ would not have needed to save infants. Our sinful nature needed to be justified in order for Life to be bestowed on it. “Your second article contains the assertion that every man is guilty of original sin. We also affirm that this is, indeed, the truth. The Psalmist says in the 50th Psalm [50:5]: “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity and in sin did my mother conceive me.” And the Lord says in the Gospels concerning the purging away of such original sin: “Unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven” (Jn 3:5)” (Patriarch Jeremias II, First Answer to the Lutherans, 1576). Once you start digging, you will find no shortage of quotes from Church Fathers East and West substantiating this. The response from the Neo-Palagianist side is handwaving and ignoring, instead doubling-down on the select out-of-context prooftexts that they think support their doctrine, as in this video. Fortunately, the backlash received from the first video shows that more Orthodox are waking up from their Romanides-induced coma and are coming to grips with our Church's actual teachings.

[@moontyk]

Can anyone provide some quotes from Holy Fathers about how after the fall, the soul and body are created at once at conception? I'm not sure about the idea that God personally creates each human, then of course He would make them perfect, but then why did the Lord have to redeem and restore our fallen nature? Even the Lord suffered the consequences of sin, like hunger, sadness, death. But we are not like the Lord sinless, we suffer more than consequences of sin, we suffer and inherit sinfulness until we're baptised.

[@St_Augustines_Cry8]

I'm sorry but most Orthodox do not speak of Augustinian theology correctly. There was no criticism of the term Original Sin until Romanedies criticized it and said to say, Ancestral Sin. No Father said Ancestral Sin. Augustine was the only one to have a comprehensive view on humanity in light of the fall and sin. I encourage people to read the City of God.

[@alexanderbrown5900]

The Greek term used is προπατορική άμaρτία, which can be translated as hereditary/ancestral/generational sin. However, I agree that Romanides tried to make a distinction where there shouldn't be one. By doing so, he actually fell into a form of Pelagianism. In the Church Fathers (not the New Soteriologists of the 20th century), original sin and ancestral/generational/hereditary sin mean the same thing. Further, St. Augustine clearly makes a distinction between inherited original sin and committed personal sin in his Against Julian: “However, it is called sin, not in such a way that it makes us guilty* [reus] , but because it is the result of the guilt [reatu] of the first man and because by rebelling it strives to draw us to guilt [reatum], unless we are aided by the grace of God through Jesus Christ our Lord, lest even the dead sin so rebel that by conquering it revives and reigns.” *personally guilty “no matter whence born, a man is innocent because there is no personal sin, and he is guilty (reum) through original sin.” Those who think St. Augustine taught inherited personal guilt are mistaken.

[@alexanderbrown5900]

To be fair to the Roman Catholics, they don't even teach inherited personal guilt. Here is what's stated in their official catechism regarding original sin (points 404 and 405): "How did the sin of Adam become the sin of all his descendants? The whole human race is in Adam "as one body of one man". By this "unity of the human race" all men are implicated in Adam's sin, as all are implicated in Christ's justice. Still, the transmission of original sin is a mystery that we cannot fully understand. But we do know by Revelation that Adam had received original holiness and justice not for himself alone, but for all human nature. By yielding to the tempter, Adam and Eve committed a personal sin, but this sin affected the human nature that they would then transmit in a fallen state. It is a sin which will be transmitted by propagation to all mankind, that is, by the transmission of a human nature deprived of original holiness and justice. And that is why original sin is called "sin" only in an analogical sense: it is a sin "contracted" and not "committed" - a state and not an act.” “Although it is proper to each individual, original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam's descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called "concupiscence". Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ's grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle." There's a reason that original sin isn't among the errors of the Roman Church listed in the 1848 Encyclical of the Eastern Patriarchs to Pius IX. It's because it isn't an error.

[@alexanderbrown5900]

11:41-12:54 St. Cyril of Alexandria on Romans 5:18: “What has Adam’s guilt [πταίσματα] got to do with us? Why are we held responsible for his sin when we were not even born when he committed it? Did not God say: The parents will not die for the children, nor the children for the parents, but the soul which has sinned, it shall die. (Ezekiel 18:19-20 LXX) How then shall we defend this doctrine? The soul, I say, which has sinned, it shall die. We have become sinners because of Adam’s disobedience in the following manner…. After he fell into sin and surrendered to corruption, impure lusts [ἡδονή τε καί ἀκαθαρσίας] invaded the nature of his flesh and at the same time the evil law of our members was born. For our nature contracted the disease of sin because of the disobedience of one man, that is Adam, and thus many became sinners. This was not because they sinned along with Adam, because they did not then exist, but because they had the same nature as Adam, which fell under the law of sin. Thus, just as human nature acquired the weakness of corruption in Adam [ἐν Ἀδὰμ] because of disobedience, and evil desires invaded it, so the same nature was later set free by Christ, who was obedient to God the Father and did not commit sin.” St. Cyril of Alexandria on the Gospel of Luke, Sermon 42: “Thus has the guilt of the disobedience that is by Adam been remitted; thus has the power of the curse ceased, and the dominion of death been brought to decay. And this too Paul teaches, saying, ‘For as by the disobedience of the one man, the many became sinners, so by the obedience of the One, the many became righteous.’ For the whole nature of man became guilty in the person of him who was first formed; but now it is wholly justified again in Christ. For He became for us the second commencement of our race after that primary one; and therefore all things in Him have become new.” 18:10-18:27 St. John Chrysostom in Baptismal Catecheses: “You see how many are the benefits of baptism, and some think its heavenly grace consists only in the remission of sins, but we have enumerated ten honors [it bestows]! For this reason we baptize even infants, though they are not defiled by [personal] sins, so that there may be given to them holiness, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, brotherhood with Christ, and that they may be his [Christ’s] members.” II Council of Mileum, Canon 3: “Whoever says that infants fresh from their mothers’ wombs ought not to be baptized, or say that they are indeed baptized unto the remission of sins, but that they draw nothing of the original sin of Adam, which is expiated in the bath of regeneration . . . let him be anathema [excommunicated]. Since what the apostle [Paul] says, ‘Through one man sin entered into the world, and death through sin, and so passed to all men, in whom all have sinned’ [Rom. 5:12], must not be understood otherwise than the Catholic Church spread everywhere has always understood it. For on account of this rule of faith even infants, who in themselves thus far have not been able to commit any sin, are therefore truly baptized unto the remission of sins, so that that which they have contracted from generation may be cleansed in them by regeneration." Not sinless (for there would then be no reason for the exercisms done before the baptism), but no PERSONAL sin. What was contracted from generation that is cleansed in us by regeneration? ORIGINAL sin.

[@TheMhouk2]

get off the internet

[@hernanmendoza7182]

Father forgive! I have no right to speak, but I beleivie you are comiting a mistake. I think your intentions are good, but that you are loosing the bigger picture. - We all have a corrupted nature, we are all slaves to sin, it is only through Christ we are saved, if salvation is only an exercise of the right will, then why was the Sacrifice of the Lord necessary? - We don´t inherit guilt, but we inherit a corrupted nature, which is not destined to Life, but to death!, thats why Christ came to save us! - Sin is a consequence of man, not of God, God does not create sinful beings, God cannot create sin, sin is a consequence of our decisions and because of Adam giving way to evil in Paradise. - Christ came to make us a new creation, His is the first Man of the New Creation! - What happens to those who doesn´t accept Christ in their life is a mystery and up to Gods judgement Father please, what you are saying is not consistent with what I have been taught! Of course God does not create people to send them to death or hell, but we get there because of our personal sins, but even if we lack personal sin, we don´t have salvation, this can only be bestowed by the Lord, through the Sacraments. To be rightoues is to lack personal sin To be saved is to partake of Christ. Father forgive my harsh word, Forgive me also if I am questioning your authority, but I don´t want people to get misinformed about our faith. Pray for me!

[@silveriorebelo2920]

you forget to precise that you are Byzantine Orthodox, not simply Orthodox

[@jasonpellegrini7148]

It says we are the children of wrath ?. I dont get it ?.

[@Cyrus_II]

What does guilt even mean? I feel like if we define these things properly, or find out how the fathers defined it, then the debate might be resolved.

[@FirstActuality]

In this case, culpability, in other words it implies one ought to be subject to a just punishment for the sin. This is not the Orthodox view of what original sin entails.

[@stephengolay1273]

God never steps away from the good from (with which) he created each and every one of us. His authorship of that good is such that he is there when we, ourselves, first open our eyes in this fallen world in which we are born - and fall in with. There so much so that the Father sent his only Son to open his own eyes in his own (incarnate) birth in this world so taken with sin. Born to trample down the darkness which so scars and blinds our first sight in this world. Therein is our hope. For God so much loved our *good* selves that . . .

[@Cyrus_II]

@@FirstActuality In terms of the implication that you put forward, the punishment for the sin of Adam was death, and every man since Adam is subject to death. So it applies. Would you change the definition?

[@FirstActuality]

@@Cyrus_II you're ignoring the key point which is culpability or blameworthiness. An infant born afterwards is not to be blamed for Adam's transgression, even though he inherits the consequences (or wages) of sin, namely death. It doesn't have to be construed as a legalistic punishment. In fact death can be seen as a mercy because without it we could not be resurrected into life, we would remain in a state of concupiscence so to speak.

[@Cyrus_II]

​@@FirstActuality The implication of being culpable and blameworthy is to suffer the consequences of the sin, which in this case is death. Unless there's another relevant implication here that I'm missing. Given that nothing happens without God's will, is there a distinction between someone suffering for someone else's sin and someone suffering because God is punishing them for their sin? I'm genuinely asking. Could it be said that God is punishing them in both cases? I would say God's punishment in the world is mercy in (almost?) every case so that's a moot point.

[@user-ht3bo1us4j]

So my question is where does free will enter into this argument and I am questioning. Also, if you don’t think children are sinful look at what happens when they don’t get their way that reaction is not godly in anyway so are we trying to say then that we receive justification by baptismand regeneration by baptism if that’s the case, why did Christ die?

[@NavelOrangeGazer]

Christ died to destroy death, that's the whole point. See all of the hymns and prayers around Pascha.

[@DixieWizard]

It would serve you well to take the time to both finish the video and write out your sentences in an intelligible manner.

[@silveriorebelo2920]

imputed guilt has not the same meaning at all as inherited guilt... for these so-called orthodox sectarians, the great argument is to say that this or that interpretation is different from the Latin, and the fact it is not atgin is supposed to mean that it is the correct way of thinking... but, throughout the centuries, there is no unified 'Latin' interpretation of original sin ...

[@marcuswilliams7448]

The affirmation of Original Sin is *not* an assertion of an ontological change in Human Nature, per se. Original Sin is best described as a deprivation of Original Righteousness. Expressions like "corruption", "sinful nature", "nature sin", etc., are, for lack of better terminology, describing this deprivation. Sin has no substantive existence, as anyone rightly confessing Original Sin knows well enough. It is spoken of as an *accident* not a *substance*. There were some who asserted that Human Nature is itself sin, but this was repudiated because to assert that Human Nature is itself sin is to assault, not only God's creative work, but, likewise, His redemptive and sanctifying work. Original Sin is, again, a deprivation of Original Righteousness; a deprivation that affects all of humanity from the point of conception; a deprivation which is a cause for sins actually committed.

[@johnnyd2383]

If there was no "ontological change in Human Nature", Lord's incarnation was unnecessary. One of Lord's achievements in His plan of salvation of mankind was restoration of the fallen and corrupt human nature. Your concept is heretical.

[@shiningdiamond5046]

We don't disagree and here's metropolitan hilarion on the topic. "if we read the text to mean ‘in whom all have sinned’, this can be understood as the passing on of Adam’s sin to all future generations of people, since human nature has been infected by sin in general. The disposition toward sin became hereditary and responsibility for turning away from God sin universal. As St Cyril of Alexandria states, human nature itself has ‘fallen ill with sin’; thus we all share Adam’s sin as we all share his nature. St Macarius of Egypt speaks of ‘a leaven of evil passions’ and of ‘secret impurity and the abiding darkness of passions’, which have entered into our nature in spite of our original purity. Sin has become so deeply rooted in human nature that not a single descendant of Adam has been spared from a hereditary predisposition toward sin. The Old Testament writers had a vivid sense of their inherited sinfulness: ‘Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me’" Consequences of Adam’s sin

[@marcuswilliams7448]

@@johnnyd2383 Your own bishop, in this very video, affirmed that there is no ontological change in Human Nature after the Fall. If you're going to troll, do better.

[@marcuswilliams7448]

@@shiningdiamond5046 Some Orthodox obviously do disagree.

[@johnnyd2383]

@@marcuswilliams7448 Human nature was once created and is ever since inherited. It is not re-created with every new human being. God creates human soul with every new conception and at that moment human being is pure just as Adam was in the pre-lapse state. However, due to the corruption human nature suffered at the fall, everyone becomes a subject to sin. Bishop's failure is in omission to recognize inheritance of the fallen human nature and I do not blame him for that. Your false and heretical view is malicious and misleading. You are trying to promote errors of the heretical Latins. That is not going to fly.

[@quasimodo6940]

If i wasnt born guilty and condemnable, why does Romans 5 say that all are condemned due to the actions of one? Furthermore, why does. St. Gregory the Theologian teach in oration 40.22-23 that those who are involuntarily unbaptized and did are not glorified even if not punished?

[@johnnyd2383]

We are all born with the corrupt nature we inherit from our parents and all the way back up to the Adam. It is action of Adam that caused the corruption. Out of that corruption we sin, but through bath of regeneration, that is Baptism, God cure our corrupt nature so that we do not sin from within, but we sin due to our conscious acceptance of the sin presented to us from outside.

[@quasimodo6940]

@@johnnyd2383 and due to that corruption, am I condemnable?

[@djurote3932]

@@quasimodo6940 Well you're living in a sinful world, if not for Original sin you would be in the Garden of Eden.

[@LadderOfDescent]

You said “why am I not born guilty?”. The “I” is the part he is honing in on. That “I” was created by God. If God fashioned your very being as what is guilty, he would be creating sin. Sin is a rebellion against God, it is the subversion of Gods good creation. God would ultimately be condemning the own works of his hands, and ultimately himself. Listen again. The key is what he said at the end. Our being is Created by God so it must be good, but we are born in a world with the effects* of the fall. Those effects must be cleansed and washed away with baptism and future intentional cooperation with sin by continuous repentance and confession. We don’t want to fall into either ditch of Calvin or Pelagius. Glory to God for his Church. ☦️

[@LadderOfDescent]

Roman’s 5 was also translated with a very Protestant bent to it. It’s worth digging into.

[@BackToOrthodoxy]

In all due respect, why do we need to get baptized for salvation if we don’t have a sin nature?

[@jiqian]

He mentions in the video that baptism isn't only for the remission of sins, so baptism is a necessity for the goal of sanctification regardless (except in, well, extremely exceptional cases, maybe).

[@silveriorebelo2920]

useless confusion

[@user-nj1rc9hk4h]

Please, dear Orthodox' believers, do not listen to the confusion spread in this video and read these verses, Romans 5:12-21, 1 Corinthians 15:21-22. Believe in the law/gospel distinction we lutherans teach and which will help you realize that our faith really is, i.e. what Jesus Christ really have done for us in word and sacraments, freely and absolutely.

[@ChumX100]

The passages you cite fully support orthodox doctrine. Romans 5:12 NKJV - Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned- Here, Paul is very specific with his words and we should not imply something that he is not saying. He is saying: - Sin entered the world through Adam. (Ancestral sin) - Death entered the world through sin. - Death spread to all men, because they sinned. These teachings are fully embraced in orthodox doctrine. It is the world that got corrupted through sin and humans being born in a corrupt world, sin and die. This is what that verse DOESN'T say: - Sin spread to all men by the sin of Adam. (Original sin) - The guilt of Adam's sin spread to all men. (Original guilt) These are misinterpretarions foreign to Scripture, not taught by the original church and introduced later in history.

[@user-nj1rc9hk4h]

Father Irinei, with all due respect, what are you talking about? Have you ever red the Bible through the law/gospel distinction? What you say is total confusion and brings to pelagianism. Προπατορικό αμάρτημα = original sin is not what Orthodox theology thinks. It is complete nakedeness of free will, before, while and after your conversion/baptism. We are saved ONLY because of Christ not our works. Our works are product of the grace upon us, i.e. of the Holy Spirit, not something we infer in our salvation, nor 0,0001%. Synergy is the great heresy of Orthodoxy and keep her believer under the law thinking it is the gospel. It is not. Orthodoxy is in fact ancient greek, stoic, platonic, neoplatonic and even yoga philosophy. Christianity is the distinction of law and gospel. The gospel is the true voice of God and law has just one role, to kill us. Be confessional lutherans, guys. You will not find what you search in Orthodoxy.

[@orthodoxwitness2374]

Nope, you're born guilty and condemnable. That's why your soul is dead upon birth as a punishment for your guilty nature: “He took upon Himself our guilty nature from the most pure Virgin and united it, new and unmixed with the old seed, to His Divine Person. He rendered it guiltless and righteous, so that all His spiritual descendants would remain outside the ancestral curse and condemnation. How so? He shares His grace with each one of us as a person, and each receives forgiveness of his sins from Him. For He did not receive from us a human person, but assumed our human nature and renewed it by uniting it with His own person.” (St. Gregory Palamas, the Homilies Homily,trans. Christopher Veniamin. Hom 5.1-2, On the Meeting of Our Lord). “He made our guilty nature new in Himself by taking it upon Himself from the Virgin’s blood, as was His good pleasure, and justifying it-He then freed all those born of Him according to the Spirit from the forefathers’ curse and condemnation" (St. Gregory Palamas, The Homilies,trans. Christopher Veniamin. Hom 60.17, On the Holy Feast of Theophany). “Nature is the same in all men, guilty and wretched in all before its reconciliation” (St. Prosper of Aquitaine, Call of the nations, 1.25). “For every man that is not absolved by the water of regeneration, is tied and bound by the guilt of the original bond… For that every living being is conceived in the guilt of our first parent the Prophet witnesses, saying, “And in sin hath my mother conceived me.” And that he who is not washed in the water of salvation, does not lose the punishment of original sin, Truth plainly declares by Itself in these words, “Except a man be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God” (St. Gregory the Diologist, Morals on the Book of Job, Volume 37, pg. 179).

[@user-nj1rc9hk4h]

Total confusion!!! The Orthodox Church is pelagian or semi-pelagian. Pelagius never said humans are not sinful. This is a gross misrepresentation of f. Irenei. He builds a srawman and then he destroys it in order to manipulate his audience. Pelagius said exactly what bishop Irenei says in this video, i.e. humans are not born in sin but they are sinful according to their use of free will and the amount of support of the grace. Pelagius believed that humans have the inherent ability to choose between good and evil without the necessity of divine intervention. He argued that God's grace assists but does not compel righteous behavior, thus maintaining human responsibility for moral decisions.

[@TheMhouk2]

Pelagius also viewed the fall as only a bad example, as he viewed human nature as self contained. St Augustine's counterpoint was that the fall resulted in the disruption of a specific kind of Grace to the nous- and that man even before the fall required this type of grace. So his views are not semi pelagian, go read St John Cassian on this, who was present at the councils condemning pelagius/semi pelagians. We affirm that human nature is not self contained, but rather a restoration of this Grace is required to work out one's salvation with fear and trembling -ergo we are not pelagian. Also you lack a nature/person distinction, human nature is not fallen, rather, human persons suffer an weakened/diminished power of willing due to the lack of divine grace from the fall.