Episode 14: Year A–First Sunday of Lent
In this episode of the Sunday Catholic Word, we focus on one apologetical theme: original sin. The second reading for this upcoming First Sunday of Lent (Year A), which comes from Romans 5:12-19, gives us opportunity to provide biblical evidence for this dogma of faith.
The Readings: https://bible.usccb.org/bible/readings/022623.cfm
Looking for Sunday Catholic Word Merchandise? Look no further! https://shop.catholic.com/catholic-answers-merchandise/?q=sunday
Hey everyone,
Welcome to The Sunday Catholic Word, a podcast where we reflect on the upcoming Sunday Mass readings and pick out the details that are relevant for explaining and defending our Catholic faith.
I’m Karlo Broussard, staff apologist and speaker for Catholic Answers, and the host for this podcast.
In this episode, we’re going to focus on one apologetical theme: original sin. The Council of Trent defined original sin as “the death of the soul.” The Catechism of the Catholic Church reaffirmed this definition in paragraph 403 and added a key nuance in paragraph 404 that such sin is called “sin” “only in an analogical sense: it is a sin ‘contracted’ and not ‘committed’—a state and not an act.”
The second reading for this upcoming First Sunday of Lent, which comes from Romans 5:12-19, gives us opportunity to provide biblical evidence for this dogma of faith.
Although we’re not going to focus on every line in the passage, it’s important to quote the whole of it to establish the context. Here’s what Paul writes:
12 Therefore, just as through one person sin entered the world, and through sin, death, and thus death came to all, inasmuch as all sinned— 13 for up to the time of the law, sin was in the world, though sin is not accounted when there is no law. 14 But death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who did not sin after the pattern of the trespass of Adam, who is the type of the one who was to come. 15 But the gift is not like the transgression. For if by that one person’s transgression the many died, how much more did the grace of God and the gracious gift of the one person Jesus Christ overflow for the many. 16 And the gift is not like the result of the one person’s sinning. For after one sin there was the judgment that brought condemnation; but the gift, after many transgressions, brought acquittal. 17 For if, by the transgression of one person, death came to reign through that one, how much more will those who receive the abundance of grace and of the gift of justification come to reign in life through the one person Jesus Christ. 18 In conclusion, just as through one transgression condemnation came upon all, so through one righteous act acquittal and life came to all. 19 For just as through the disobedience of one person the many were made sinners, so through the obedience of one the many will be made righteous.
It’s this passage, or at least certain verses within it, that the Magisterium of the Church has appealed to for biblical support of the dogma of original sin.
For example, the Council of Trent appeals to Romans 5:12 specifically in its Decree Concerning Original Sin, which was issued in the Fifth Session in 1546. It stated the following:
If anyone asserts, that the prevarication of Adam injured himself alone, and not his posterity; and that he lost for himself alone, and not for us also, the holiness and justice, received of God, which he lost; or that he, defiled by the sin of disobedience, has only transfused death, and pains of the body, into the whole human race, but not sin also, which is the death of the soul, let him be anathema; inasmuch as he contradicts the apostle, who says: By one man sin entered into the world, and by sin death, and so death passed upon all men, in whom all have sinned [Rom. 5:12].[1]
Romans 5:12 is the text that the Council quotes here.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church appeals to both verses 12, 18, and 19 in its teaching that original sin is a consequence of Adam’s sin for all of humanity. It states in paragraph 402,
All men are implicated in Adam’s sin, as St. Paul affirms: “By one man’s disobedience many [that is, all men] were made sinners” [Rom. 5:12]: “sin came into the world through one man and death through sin, and so death spread to all men because all men sinned.…” [Rom. 5:19]. The Apostle contrasts the universality of sin and death with the universality of salvation in Christ. “Then as one man’s trespass led to condemnation for all men, so one man’s act of righteousness leads to acquittal and life for all men” [Rom. 5:18].
Note the Catechism’s teaching that “all men are implicated in Adam’s sin” and the “universality of sin.” Both are a reference to original sin.
Now that we’ve established a Magisterial ground for appealing to this text as evidence for the dogma of original sin, let’s turn to an exegetical ground.
We can start with verse 12. Recall, Paul writes, “[J]ust as through one person sin entered the world, and through sin, death, and thus death came to all, inasmuch as all sinned.”
The question here is whether the sin that Paul speaks of is personal sin or original sin.
If we can show that it’s not personal sin, then it would follow that he’s talking about original sin.
How might we establish that Paul is not talking about personal sin?
Well, let’s start with this question. Which members of the human race could not possibly be guilty of personal sin? Clearly, one answer is infants. Another is the severely mentally handicapped.
So, if we can show that infants and the severely mentally handicapped must be numbered among the “all sinned,” then it would follow that Paul is thinking of original sin.
The key for proving the antecedent (that infants and the severely mentally handicapped must be numbered among the “all sinned”) is the connection that Paul makes between death and sin: “death came to all, inasmuch as all sinned.” Notice Paul draws a parallel between the “all” that constitutes the group “all sinned” and the “all” that constitutes the group “death came to all.” Moreover, Paul sees the death that extends to all as an effect of the sin that extends to all.
Do infants and the severely mentally handicapped die? Yes.
Given the parallel between the two groups, it follows that infants and the mentally handicapped are included within the category of “all have sinned.”
And if that’s the case, then Paul is not thinking of personal sin here; he’s thinking of original sin.
We might summarize our argument like this:
P1: Whoever dies is included within Paul’s category of “all have sinned.”
P2: Infants and the severely mentally handicapped die.
C1: Therefore, infants and the severely mentally handicapped are included within Paul’s category of “all have sinned.”
P1: There is only two possible ways in which infants and the severely mentally handicapped could be included in Paul’s category of “all men have sinned”—either by way of actual sin or original sin.
P2: They can’t be included in Paul’s category by way of actual sin.
C: Therefore, they can only be included in Paul’s category by way of original sin.
Now, someone might counter, “If we say that whoever dies is included within the category of “all sinned,” then we must say that Jesus and Mary would have to be included within the category of “all sinned” because they both died, or at least Jesus if we want to say that Mary didn’t die, which is absurd.”
In response, this would be true if and only if we didn’t have a source of knowledge other than Jesus and Mary’s humanity for knowing that they were exceptions to the rule.
For example, we can say that it belongs to the nature of a human being as corporeal being to die. And suppose that I know this prior to my observation of Aristotle dying. When I observe Aristotle die, I can reasonably infer that Aristotle is a corporeal being.
But suppose that it’s revealed God will preserve Aristotle from death. Given that he doesn’t die, must I conclude that he’s not a corporeal being? Of course not. I know that he still belongs to the category of corporeal beings even though he doesn’t die precisely because I have something other than Aristotle’s nature for determining whether he will die: God’s revelation.
Similarly, although death belongs to those who have contracted the sin of Adam by nature, it doesn’t follow that Jesus and Mary must have contracted the sin of Adam by nature. The reason is that we have something other than Jesus and Mary’s death and human nature for determining whether they have contracted Adam’s sin by nature: God’s revelation.
We don’t have any such revelation when it comes to infants and the severely mentally handicapped. This being the case, the death that they experience is seen as evidence for being included among the group “all sinned” because Paul clearly teaches that death extends to all as an effect of the type of sin that he’s speaking of.
Given that infants and the severely mentally handicapped are included in Paul’s category of “all sinned,” and we know that such members of the human race cannot commit personal sin, it follows that in Romans 5:12 Paul is thinking about original sin and not personal sin.
There’s another line of argumentation that we can employ to show that Paul is not talking about personal sin but rather original sin.
Consider that the “all sinned” refers either A) to every human being, including those humans who can’t personally sin, like infants and the severely mentally handicapped, or B) only human beings who have committed personal sin.
Now, if Paul is referring only to humans who have committed personal sin, then such people would be included within the category of “all sinned” by imitation of Adam.
But if that’s the case, then death would extend only to those who commit personal sin, since Paul clearly teaches that death extends to all that are included within the category “all sinned”: “death spread to all men because all men sinned” (v.12). Surely, death doesn’t extend only to those who commit personal sin. Infants and the severely mentally handicapped also die.
Therefore, the “all sinned” cannot refer only to human beings who have committed personal sin; it must refer to every human being, including those humans who can’t personally sin, like infants and the severely mentally handicapped.
It follows from this that personal sin is not Paul’s target here in Romans 5:12-19. Rather, his target is original sin.
Well, that does it for this episode of the Sunday Catholic Word.
Original sin is the key apologetical theme for the 1st Sunday of Lent. And Romans 5:12-19 is the biblical evidence.
Thank you for subscribing to the podcast. Please be sure to tell your friends about it and invite them to subscribe as well. Also, if you’re interested in getting some cool mugs and stickers with my logo, “Mr. Sunday podcast,” go to shop.catholic.com.
I hope that you have a great 1st Sunday of Lent.
[1] T.A. Buckley, The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent (George Routledge and Co., 1851), 22.