Comparison of Teachings on Original Sin

[everbecoming2007]

The purpose of this thread is to compare the teachings of the Catechism of the Catholic Church and the thirty-nine Articles on a particular point concerning original sin. According to the modern Catechism, original sin is not a personal fault, but a state -- that is, we are not guilty of Adam's sin personally:

http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s2c1p7.htm404 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".293 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.294 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.
http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s2c1p7.htmhttp://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/p1s2c1p7.htm405 Although it is proper to each individual,295 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.

I am not sure if the thirty-nine Articles differ on the point of whether we are personally guilty of Adam's sin. I am not all that familiar with the style of language the Articles use. But they say:


[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]

IX. Of Original or Birth-Sin.
Original sin standeth not in the following of Adam, (as the Pelagians do vainly talk but it is the fault and corruption of the Nature of every man, that naturally is engendered of the offspring of Adam; whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and is of his own nature inclined to evil, so that the flesh lusteth always contrary to the Spirit; and therefore in every person born into this world, it deserveth God's wrath and damnation. And this infection of nature doth remain, yea in them that are regenerated; whereby the lust of the flesh, called in Greek, p¢vnæa sapk¢s, (which some do expound the wisdom, some sensuality, some the affection, some the desire, of the flesh), is not subject to the Law of God. And although there is no condemnation for them that believe and are baptized; yet the Apostle doth confess, that concupiscence and lust hath of itself the nature of sin.

[/FONT]


[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]When the Articles say that original sin is "the fault and corruption of the Nature of every man," would that indicate that we are personally guilty of Adam's sin, or would it indicate something more along the lines of the current Catholic teaching, that we share in his sin in an analogical sense? I am a little unsure as to whether a fault of our nature would be a personal fault, or only a participation in the effects of the sin through human nature in a general sense. What say you?
[/FONT]