|
Original Goodness vs.
Original Sin Freedom or Subjection By the druid Finn The
doctrines of original goodness and original sin represent two
very different ways of understanding human existence. One begins from
affirmation and freedom; the other begins from guilt and subjection. The
debate is not just ancient theology — it shaped the structure of Western
religion, culture, and power. The Idea of Original Goodness The
notion of original goodness can be traced back to the biblical
creation story in Genesis 1, where God declares the whole of creation “very
good.” It was re-emphasised in Christian history by figures such as Pelagius
(c. 360–418 CE), and more recently echoed by spiritual writers and naturalist
thinkers like the druid mystic, Finn. Key
points of original goodness: ·
Human beings are born innocent. There is
no inherited guilt or corruption at birth. ·
Freedom is intact. Each
person has the natural capacity to choose good or evil. ·
Nature is trustworthy. To exist
at all is to participate in the goodness of creation. ·
Responsibility is real. Because
freedom is real, moral striving and discipline matter. In short,
original goodness affirms life as fundamentally positive. Every emergent
being — from seed to child — is already a “winner” simply by existing. The Idea of Original Sin By
contrast, the doctrine of original sin, developed most forcefully by
Augustine of Hippo (354–430 CE), argues that the (alleged) first disobedience
of Adam and Eve corrupted all humanity. Paul the apostle had already framed
Adam’s act in Romans 5 as the entry point of sin and death. Augustine
systematised this into a universal doctrine. Key
points of original sin: ·
Inherited guilt. Every
human being is born already tainted by Adam’s sin. ·
Freedom is crippled. Human
will is bound; without divine grace, no one can
avoid sin. ·
Humanity is corrupt. Even
infants are in need of baptism to escape
condemnation. ·
Grace is institutional. The
Church, through its sacraments, is the necessary channel of salvation. Original
sin redefines human existence as fundamentally flawed, with freedom
subordinated to the necessity of divine intervention. Freedom vs. Subjection
The
contrast is stark. Original goodness affirms maximum freedom: each
person can live, choose, and become themselves. Original sin imposes absolute
subjection: every person is bound, guilty, dependent on the Church. Historical Outcome ·
Pelagius and his supporters were
condemned as heretics in 418 CE. Their affirmation of human goodness was
silenced in the Latin West. ·
Augustine’s doctrine became
official orthodoxy. It shaped Catholic, Protestant, and much of Western
Christian thought for centuries. ·
The political effect was enormous: a Church that
could declare every human guilty at birth positioned itself as the sole
mediator of salvation. The Enduring Question The
debate between original goodness and original sin still matters. ·
Do we begin life already condemned, requiring
external rescue? ·
Or do we begin life already good, free, and
capable — needing guidance, but not absolution? The first
vision fosters guilt and dependence. The second fosters affirmation and
responsibility. Conclusion The
choice between original goodness, as proposed by the druid Finn, and original sin,
as proposed by Augustin of Hippo, is a choice between two anthropologies: one
of freedom, the other of subjection. ·
Original goodness sees
emergence as victory: everyone is born a winner. ·
Original sin sees existence as debt:
everyone is born a loser in need of rescue. History
shows which side won in institutional terms. But the druidic voice, echoed
from Pelagius to modern interpreters, continues to remind us: life itself is
good, freedom is real, and existence is not a curse but a gift. |