Adam And Eve

[Apotheoun]

[i]Below is a post I wrote some time ago on the ancestral sin that may be helpful:[/i]


Death is natural to created beings, because God created them [i]ex nihilo[/i]. Thus, creatures do not contain innately within themselves the power to exist, and this is even true of man when he is first created. In other words, man is created only with the potential to become eternal, but this potential requires that he live virtuously in likeness to God.

Now, in the Byzantine tradition, following the teaching of the Eastern Fathers, there is a distinction to be made between man's being created in the image of God, and his being made in the divine likeness. From the very beginning the image of God is essential to humanity; and so, Adam possessed the divine image in full act, while the likeness to God is acquired through living a life of virtue in synergy with the divine energy, and Adam only possessed that quality in potency. Of course, as the Genesis narrative reveals, Adam failed to "liken" (Gr., [i]omoiosis[/i], i.e., assimilate) himself to God, and by his failure he brought death to himself and to all of his descendants, but death was not what God intended for humanity, although it was something that Adam -- and all men after him -- could choose. That said, it is clear that the ancestral sin of Adam doomed humanity to annihilation, but as the Eastern Fathers explain (and in particular St. Irenaeus and St. Athanasios) the incarnation of the eternal Logos restored the communion with God lost by Adam in the beginning, and opened up once again to man the possibility of integrating his nature with his hypostasis (i.e., person) in order to live virtuously, and in the process to transcend his created existence. This assimilation to God through grace (i.e., divine energy) and virtue is called [i]theosis[/i] (i.e., divinization), and this eternal and uncreated gift of [i]theosis[/i] was part of God’s plan for humanity from the very beginning.

Finally, as far as creation in general is concerned, it is finite by its very nature, and it is only deified by man as a part of his own [i]theosis[/i] (divinization), because man is properly the priest of creation. As St. Maximos the Confessor explained in his “Chapters on Love,” being is given through creation, and ever-being through the incarnation, while ever-well-being (i.e., the vision of God) or ever-ill-being (i.e., damnation) are in the power of each man's will in cooperation with the divine energy.

[LouisvilleFan]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1837500' date='Apr 16 2009, 05:32 PM']Speculation about Adam's silence in connection with Eve's temptation being the cause of ancestral sin is not a part of the Church's tradition. To be blunt: Adam, as the head of mankind, caused the fall by eating the forbidden fruit.[/quote]

Hmm... I'm confused because I didn't say Adam's silence caused sin to enter the world. I said it played a role. I suppose that role would be either allowing Eve to eat the forbidden fruit or failing to oppose Eve when she approached him with it, but either way, Adam wussed out and ate the fruit. It's not like he was ignorant of what he was about to do before he did it.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='LouisvilleFan' post='1837598' date='Apr 16 2009, 03:41 PM']. . . I didn't say Adam's silence caused sin to enter the world. I said it played a role.[/quote]
That assertion is a modern idea attributable to something that Dr. Hahn said in one of his books, but it has no support in the patristical tradition.

[HisChildForever]

Where do you think Adam was while Eve was being tempted? Has there ever been any speculation?

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1837673' date='Apr 16 2009, 04:42 PM']Where do you think Adam was while Eve was being tempted? Has there ever been any speculation?[/quote]
I have no idea where he was, because it is not a part of divine revelation.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1837673' date='Apr 16 2009, 04:42 PM']Has there ever been any speculation?[/quote]
I am sure that someone at some point in time has speculated on this topic, but any theory that a person might devise would not be a part of the Church's authoritative tradition.

[LouisvilleFan]

Okay, so it's not part of the patristic tradition... common sense says Adam wasn't far off if he wasn't standing right there next to her. I know some of the Church Fathers have written more than we probably care to read about the Fall and connections between the Fall and the Crucifixion. I find it hard to imagine with that verse from Isaiah that the silence of Jesus during the accusations against him didn't have a purpose in his redemptive work. And whatever played a role in our redemption, seems to have played a role in the Fall. Isn't that much, at least, part of divine revelation?

[Justified Saint]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1837458' date='Apr 16 2009, 01:52 PM']The teaching of St. Athanasios, and the other Eastern Fathers, is that if Adam had not sinned bringing corruption and death into the world, no one (not even Eve) would have experienced any suffering.[/quote]

There is a different tradition in the West.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Justified Saint' post='1840492' date='Apr 19 2009, 11:57 AM']There is a different tradition in the West.[/quote]
Which Western Father teaches that Eve would have suffered pain even if Adam, the head of the human race, had not sinned?

[Justified Saint]

I do not claim that a Western father had entertained the hypothetical situation of a sinless Adam, only that in the West there are more ambigious strands as to the extent and agency of Eve's involvement in the fall. And for example, Geoffrey of Vendôme, a monk and cardinal of the 12th century, writes that "for had not [woman's] sin [b]required it[/b], Our Savior would not have had to die. Woe unto this sex, which knows nothing of awe, goodness, or friendship." Anselm also writes, "So that women need not despair of attaining the state of the blessed, given that woman was the cause of so great an evil, it was [b]necessary[/b], in order to restore their hope, that a woman be the cause of so great a good." These and much more all make problematic the claim that Adam, and thus men, are the only active force in humanity.

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Justified Saint' post='1840515' date='Apr 19 2009, 02:34 PM']These and much more all make problematic the claim that Adam, and thus men, are the only active force in humanity.[/quote]

Just look at Mary.

[Apotheoun]

Adam, and not Eve, curses all of humanity through his sinful action, because he alone -- through the act of God's creating him at the beginning of time -- is the head of the human family, and so it was his action alone that made all men mortal. Christ, the new Adam, who by His incarnation and paschal mystery becomes the new head of the human family, reverses Adam's sin and brings life.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Justified Saint' post='1840515' date='Apr 19 2009, 12:34 PM']. . . These and much more all make problematic the claim that Adam, and thus men, are the only active force in humanity.[/quote]
It is not about the idea that only men are the active force in humanity; instead, the theology of the Church on the nature of the ancestral sin and its effect upon mankind (i.e., mortality) is connected to Adam's headship. Eve, and women in general, are not merely passive, but Eve was not the head of the human race.

Edited April 19, 2009 by Apotheoun

[HisChildForever]

I get everything Apoth is saying, but just because Adam was the head of Eve does not mean that she was dependent on him. I feel that she knew what she was doing when she accepted the fruit.

[Apotheoun]

"For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive." (1 Cor. 15:21-22)

One man (Adam) brought death, and one Man (Christ) brings life. Mortality enters into the world through Adam alone, just as everlasting life comes only through Christ.

[Apotheoun]

I know it is not politically correct to say this, but headship does indicate the dependence of those who form the body upon the head, and to deny this is to deny that we are all dependent upon Christ, who is the new head of the human race.

Edited April 19, 2009 by Apotheoun

[HisChildForever]

[quote name='Apotheoun' post='1840527' date='Apr 19 2009, 03:00 PM']I know it is not politically correct to say this, but headship does indicate the dependence of those who form the body upon the head, and to deny this is to deny that we are all dependent upon Christ, who is the new head of the human race.[/quote]

Oh, well I just mean that Eve did not need Adam present to tell her it would be unwise to eat the fruit. She was fully capable of choosing "yes" or "no." Just because a wife submits to her husband does not mean she cannot be strong or wise when it comes to decision-making.

[Apotheoun]

My point is a theological one, and it is limited to this: death was caused by Adam alone, because he alone was the head of the human race and all human beings are mystical contained within him. And following upon this doctrinal truth is the fact that Christ is the new Adam, i.e., the new head of humanity, and all human beings are mystically contained within Him, and that is why He alone saves mankind from death and sin.

[Justified Saint]

You simply asked for evidence within the Western tradition that would suggest something other about Eve's singularity in the fall, and that I provided. Turning to what was actually effected by Adam in the fall, Ambrose says that "woman was the author of man's fall, not man of woman's."

The analogy between Eve and Mary is a lot more evident than the one between Adam and Christ, for while the former were both created beings, that is not the case in the latter. There is a near consenus on this among many Church Fathers where the formula is "Death through Eve, life through Mary." This formula is echoed from Augustine and Jerome to Anselm.

As I said, the Western tradition sounds a bit different than yours on this issue, or if nothing else it is more ambigious on the role of Eve (i.e. not an either/or position).

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='Justified Saint' post='1840748' date='Apr 19 2009, 05:23 PM']The analogy between Eve and Mary is a lot more evident than the one between Adam and Christ, for while the former were both created beings, that is not the case in the latter. There is a near consenus on this among many Church Fathers where the formula is "Death through Eve, life through Mary." This formula is echoed from Augustine and Jerome to Anselm.[/quote]
The typology between Adam and Christ is part of the biblical tradition. Christ alone brings life, for He is life itself, while Adam alone brings death.