089. I. Formula Of Original Sin.
I. Formula Of Original Sin.
1. Analysis of the Formula.—Original sin, as a doctrinal formula, is common to the orthodox creeds for the expression and characterization of native sinfulness. Augustine first brought it into prominence for this purpose, but it is older than Augustine, and its first doctrinal use is ascribed to Tertullian. For any doctrinal formula so long in use, and so fundamental, might claim a prescriptive authority. Such formulas, however, are human creations, and, while entitled to most respectful consideration, must be open to questioning respecting the doctrines for which they stand. Especially must their interpretation in doctrinal discussion be open to questioning, for often several questions of doctrine are treated as one question, or as inseparable questions, which a proper analysis and method must separate and treat separately. This is necessary to clearness of doctrinal view. There has been much neglect of such method in the treatment of original sin. In the Augustinian anthropology, and in the creeds which formulate a doctrine of sin according to that anthropology, original sin includes a common guilt of Adam’s sin, a common native depravity as the consequence of that guilt, and a sinfulness of the depravity which in all men deserves both temporal and eternal punishment.[468] It is further maintained by Augustinians that native depravity is itself a punishment inflicted upon all men on the ground of a participation in the sin of Adam. This account of depravity as a retribution of the divine justice makes that retribution a part of the doctrine of original sin. We thus find in this formula several questions of fact which are without any such logical or scientific connection that the truth of one must carry with it the truth of any other, much less the truth of all the others. It is for the reason of this unification of distinct questions that the doctrinal formula which represents them requires thorough analysis. The jumbling method of treating these several questions as one truth of original sin should give place to their separation and separate treatment. Clearness of view and truth of doctrine are not otherwise attainable.
[468]
2. Doctrinal Isolation of Native Depravity.—The question of native depravity is simply the question whether man is by nature or birth morally depraved or corrupt, alien from the spiritual life, and inclined to evil. Whether on any ground, or under any law, he is a sharer in the sin of Adam, or in the guilt of his sin; or whether depravity as a fact is a divine punishment justly inflicted on the ground of a common participation in that sin ; or whether depravity itself is of the nature of sin and deserves the eternal retribution of the divine justice—these are questions distinct and apart from the one question respecting native depravity. The truth of this question does not depend upon the truth of the others. In the further treatment of anthropology these questions must be considered. They hold such a place in doctrinal creeds and theological discussions that they could not with any propriety be omitted. Each will find its proper place in our discussion. For the present we are concerned only with the separate and distinct question of native depravity.