Neo-Pelagianism Assaults the Church

by Emanuel Valenza

IN MY PARISH in Las Vegas, Nevada, an heretical ten-page catechism¹ is used to explain the Catholic Church's so-called "new" teachings on baptism and original sin. The catechism is handed out to Catholic parents or expectant parents who want to get their children baptized. Analysis of its contents follows.

This catechism asserts that since the revised rites of adult and children baptism called for by Vatican II have been issued, "we have arrived at a more mature understanding of original sin." The more mature Catholic mind understands original sin as "being conceived and born into . . . a community of sin." He has outgrown the immature belief that original sin is the sin of Adam that is transmitted to his posterity through natural generation. Here is the relevant passage, which we quote in full in order to scrutinize various statements:

It is fashionable to reject the Church's teaching on original sin by stating that the biblical account of the Fall, which is contained in Gen. 2:17 and 3:1ff., is symbolic rather than literal. The catechism goes a step further in its attack by maintaining that this is the Church's position. Its statement, "The language of the Bible, where we learn about original sin, is figurative and symbolic rather than literal," is false for two reasons. The Church teaches that 1) there are aspects of the Genesis account of original sin that must be understood in their literal historical sense; and that 2) the account of the Fall in Genesis is not the only place in the Bible where we learn about original sin; other pertinent statements in both the Old and New Testaments must be taken into consideration.

Regarding what is symbolic and what is literal in the first three chapters of Genesis, the Biblical Commission, on June 30, 1909, in response to a query affirmed that, among others, the following states of affairs must be understood in the literal historical sense:

Besides the story of the Fall, we learn about original sin from other statements in the Bible. Because these statements affirm, either implicitly or explicitly, that man is conceived with the stain of sin (filth, uncleanliness) on his soul, they are incompatible with the belief that original sin is "the situation of the world into which we are born."

Consider, for example, the prophecies of baptism of Isaias, Ezichiel, and Zacharias: "Wash yourselves, be clean . . ." (Is. 1:16). "And I will pour upon you clean water, and you shall be cleansed from all your filthiness, and I will cleanse you from your idols" (Ez. 36:25). "In that day there shall be a fountain open to the house of David, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem: for the washing of the sinner . . ." (Zach. 13:1).

Two more  passages in the Old Testament are instructive. Psalm 50:7: "Indeed, in guilt was I born, and in sin my mother conceived me." And Job laments that no man "is clean of defilement . . . however short his days" (14:4-5).

Consider, too, some passages in the New Testament. St. Paul says in Rom. 5:19: "For just as by the disobedience of the one man the many were constituted sinners, so also by the obedience of the one the many will be constituted just." St. Peter urges, "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Ghost" (Acts:2:38) Ananias tells St. Paul to "Get up and be baptized and wash away thy sins, calling on His name" (Acts 22: 16).

Again, directly or indirectly, all these passages refer to the sinful state of man at conception. We are born with the stain of original sin on our souls. Quite obviously, these passages do not mention or allude to this sin as "the situation of the world into which we are born." We are not sinful because the world is sinful; we are not defiled because the world is defiled; we are not unclean because the world is unclean.

In addition, the belief that original sin is the being born "into a community of sin," cannot account for death as one effect of original sin. Adam transmitted not only sin to his posterity but death, too. Our first parents became subject to death when Adam transgressed God's command (Gen. 2:17, 3:3). Furthermore Adam's descendants, like Adam, would have been immortal had he not sinned; but because of his sin they also came under the dominion of death (Gen. 3: 19). As St. Paul puts it, "Therefore as through one man sin entered into the world and through sin death, and thus death has passed unto all men because all have sinned (Rom. 5:12). The words "all have sinned" it should be noted, must be understood in the sense that all have contracted Adam's sin, not in the sense that all have committed actual sins. That this is the correct interpretation is clear from verse 14, where St. Paul says that "death reigned from Adam until Moses even over those who did not sin after the likeness of the transgression of Adam." That is, death had dominion even over those who, unlike Adam, committed no personal sin. Hence St. Paul has in mind original sin in verse 12 when he uses the words "all have sinned." Moreover, this interpretation of St. Paul is identical in meaning to his position in I Cor. 15:21: "For since by a man came death, by a man also comes resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so in Christ all will be made to live."

But if original sin is the being born into a sinful world, then how can this belief explain death as a consequence of original sin? It cannot. For death is not the result of our actual sins, as we have seen. Similarly, this false theory of original sin cannot account for the death of infants, who commit no actual sins. Death can only be explained as the effect of Adam's sin; a death that is transmitted with his sin to his descendants through natural generation. "For God formed man to be imperishable; the image of his own nature he made him. But by the envy of the devil, death entered the world, and they who are in his possession experience it" (Wis. 2:23-24).

Although this heretical catechism affirms the Catholic belief that "Adam and Eve used their freedom to disobey God and to sin," Adam's sin cannot be called original sin if it is believed that original sin is "being conceived and born into a community of sin." Quite obviously, as the first human, Adam could not be conceived; he was "formed out of the dust of the ground and [God] breathed into his nostrils the breath of life . . ." (Gen. 2:7). As no one existed to conceive Adam, so no one existed to sin. Hence the world into which Adam came was not a sinful one. And if it is objected that the world was sinful because Adam, as father and representative of the human race, was created sinful, then the Catholic teaching that Adam was created in a state of original justice is rejected. "If anyone does not profess that the first man Adam immediately lost the justice and holiness in which he was constituted when he disobeyed the command of God in the Garden of Paradise . . .let him be anathema."⁴

Unlike Adam, Christ was born into a sinful world. If this is original sin, then Christ contracted it. But to accuse Christ of sin, whether original or personal, is blasphemous. Christ not only did not sin, he could not sin; for the Hypostatic Union, that is, the union of the divine and human natures in the one person of Christ, precludes the committing of sin.

Although Christ was a descendant of Adam, He was not subject to sin, moreover, because He was conceived in a supernatural way by the Holy Ghost (Matt. 1:18, 20; Luke 1:35).

The Blessed Virgin Mary, like her Son, was born into an evil world. Again, if this is original sin then Mary was subject to it. But Mary was preserved from all sin, whether original or personal, by a special assistance from God.⁵ By a unique privilege of God, Mary was preserved not from the coming into a sinful world, but from the lack of sanctifying grace in the soul at conception which is the essence of original sin, as will be shown. In other words, Mary was conceived in the state of sanctifying grace. This is, of course, the dogma of the Immaculate Conception.

The belief that original sin is the "situation of the world into which we are born," besides being at odds with passages in the Bible and incapable of explaining death and the exclusion of the Virgin Mary and Christ from original sin, renders the rite of baptism itself nonsensical. For the rite proceeds with the belief that the infant is conceived in sin and thus is under the dominion of the devil.

For example, during the first exorcism the priest breathes upon the face of the child while saying once: "Depart from him, thou unclean spirit, and give place to the Holy Ghost, the Paraclete."

During another prayer, the priest calls upon God to "Banish from him all blindness of heart; break asunder all the snares of Satan in which he has been entangled." The priest lays his hand on the head of the candidate to show that the Church has taken possession of this soul.

In the second exorcism, the priest in God's name commands the spirit of evil to withdraw from the body and the life of the person to be baptized:

I adjure thee, thou unclean spirit, in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost: depart and keep far from this servant of God . . . He Himself is commanding thee, accursed reprobate . . . Therefore, accursed fiend, acknowledge thy defeat and cede the honor to Jesus Christ, His Son, and to the Holy Ghost. Withdraw from this servant of God . . . because He has deigned to choose this soul for Himself, and Jesus Christ our Lord has been pleased to call him to His holy grace and blessing, even to the font of baptism.

These prayers and exorcisms of the priest—indeed, the whole rite of baptism as the sacrament of rebirth—presuppose the Catholic belief that the infant is conceived in sin, a sin that is contracted from Adam. The rite does not make sense if it is believed that original sin is the being born into a sinful world.

The catechism's position that the Church, with the issuance of the revised rites, renounced its doctrine that original sin is the sin of Adam which is transmitted to his descendants by the act of natural generation, is fatuous. So absurd is the catechism's claim, it does not even essay to offer evidence from the official documents of the Church. More often than not, heretics working within the Church to undermine her God—given teaching and governing authority advance their satanic drivel in the name of Vatican II. Since Vatican II said very little about original sin, and certainly did not reject or "update" the traditional teaching, the catechism uses another tactic in vogue among the enemies of the Church: the Church is said to have changed its teaching as the result of the more mature view of modern biblical scholarship. In other words, according to the catechism, a de fide teaching of the Church ceases to be obligatory on faith because modern biblical scholarship demands it. A revealed truth is no longer true, and hence no longer revealed, because so-called Catholic theologians—and let us not forget the contributions of our Protestant friends—have "discovered" otherwise. To which it must be responded: bosh!

The whole corpus of revealed truth, that is, all that Christ taught (Matt. 28:19:20), has been entrusted to the Church's Teaching Authority, not to the theologians, to preserve, interpret, and proclaim. Pius XII, in his encyclical Humani Generis, writes:

God has given His Church a living teaching authority to make clear for us and to unravel what in the deposit of faith is contained only in an obscure manner and implicitly. The task of interpreting the deposit authentically was entrusted by Our Divine Redeemer not to the individual Christian, nor even to the theologians, but only to the Church's teaching authority.⁶

This Teaching Authority is the Magisterium.

In contrast, the role of the theologian vis-a-vis the deposit of faith is "to show how the doctrine of the teaching authority of the Church is contained in Scripture and in the sacred Tradition, whether explicitly or implicitly," as Humani Generis states.⁷ Just as the Magisterium preserves, interprets, and proclaims God's Revelation, so the theologian preserves what the Magisterium preserves, interprets as the Magisterium interprets, and proclaims what the Magisterium proclaims.

Pope Pius XII also points out in Humani Generis that the theologian must go beyond defending the teaching of the Church and probe deeper into the "inexhaustible treasures" of Divine Revelation. But from the truth that the mysteries of the faith are inexhaustible, that is, they cannot be grasped in all their plenitude by the human mind, many theologians have concluded that the human mind cannot grasp revealed truths at all, and hence doctrinal statements are provisional and constantly in need of revision and re-evaluation. Consequently, contradictory doctrines about the same revealed truth are possible; for no one knows what the revealed truth is. Pius XII warned against such dogmatic relativism in Humani Generis.⁸

Moreover, the Catholic theologian, as a member of the Church, must believe "everything . . . that is contained in the written word of God, or in tradition, and that is proposed by the Church as a divinely revealed object of belief either in a solemn decree or in her ordinary, universal teaching."⁹ When he falls into formal heresy, the theologian relinquishes the name "Catholic" and ceases to be a Catholic theologian.

Original sin is not the being born into a sinful world. The statement is obviously heretical. The de fide teaching of the Church has always been that original sin is the sin of Adam that is transmitted to his posterity through natural generation. Witness the statements of some of the councils.

The Second Council of Orange (AD 529): "If anyone asserts that Adam's sin was injurious only to Adam and not to his descendants, or if he declares that it . . . [was not] the sin, the death of the soul, that passed from one man to all the human race, he attributes an injustice to God and contradicts the words of the Apostles . . ."¹⁰

The Council of Trent (1546) states that original sin is the "sin of Adam, which is one by origin, and which is communicated to all men by propagation not by imitation, and which is in all men and proper to each. . ."¹¹

Vatican I (1869-70), in its Schema of the Dogmatic Constitution on the Principal Mysteries of the Faith, asserts: "This sin of Adam is transmitted to all his children by propagation, not by imitation; and it constitutes each man in the condition of a sinner. This is what the Church has always taught, and what the Council of Trent has defined."¹²

Furthermore, if it is believed that original sin is "the situation of the world into which we are born," and not true sin in us that is contracted from Adam at conception, then the confession in the Nicene Creed—"I believe in one baptism for the remission of sins"—cannot of necessity be understood in a literal, true sense. But this position is condemned by the Council of Carthage,¹³ which anathema is repeated practically verbatim by the Council of Trent:

What exactly is the nature of original sin? The Second Council of Orange, as previously quoted, calls original sin "the death of the soul" (Denz. 175). Trent affirmed this teaching.¹⁵ It added that because all men are descendants of Adam, "in their conception they contract injustice as their own."¹⁶ But Trent describes injustice as the lack of sanctifying grace, and justice as sanctifying grace: "Justification is a passing from the state in which man is born a son of the first Adam [that is, without holiness and justice; cf. Denz. 789], to a state of grace and adoption as sons of God through the second Adam, Jesus Christ our Savior."¹⁷ Therefore original sin in its essence is the lack of sanctifying grace. And this is the definition given by the Schema of the Dogmatic Constitution on the Principal Mysteries of the Faith (Chap. 3, can. 5), of Vatican I: "If anyone says that . . . the privation of sanctifying grace is not of the essence of original sin: let him be anathema."¹⁸

Since the catechism holds that original sin is being conceived and born into a community of sin, then obviously it distorts the Catholic teaching that baptism remits original sin. According to the catechism, the removal of original sin at baptism consists of the hope that goodness will triumph over evil:

The Christian community believing in Christ and living the Life of the Spirit, gives each of us hope that we can win against the forces of evil. This is what baptism promises and why we say it takes away original sin. It says we are one with God and with each other, and that we can live peacefully together (p. 8).

In contradiction, the Council of Trent in its Decree on Original Sin (canon 5), states that baptism removes all sin, original and personal: "If anyone says that through the grace of Our Lord Jesus Christ conferred in baptism the guilt of original sin is not remitted, or even says that not everything having the true and proper nature of sin is taken away . . . let him be anathema."¹⁹

Baptism remits original sin by infusing sanctifying grace into the soul. It gives new life to the soul, which is spiritually dead because of the lack of sanctifying grace since conception. The new life given in baptism is "the sanctification and renovation of the interior man."²⁰ It is the "being joined to [the] Divine Head by faith, by hope and by love."²¹

In it we are "innocent, without stain, pure, no longer hateful, but beloved sons of God, heirs, indeed, of God and joint heirs with Christ so that absolutely nothing delays [our] entrance into heaven."²²

Since the catechism holds that we are not conceived in original sin, it quite logically maintains, to use the words of Trent just quoted, that "absolutely nothing delays our entrance into heaven" should we die as infants without having been baptized. Baptism, in other words, is not necessary for salvation. Nor is it absolutely necessary for entrance into the Catholic Church. The catechism explains:

Under the pretense of not wanting to limit God, the author of the catechism commits heresy—again! The Sacrament of Baptism is not the ordinary entrance into the Catholic Church, it is the only entrance! Not even the non-sacramental baptism of desire incorporates one into the Church, and therefore the individual does not have the right to receive the other sacraments. The initiatory rite of baptism was instituted by Christ Himself, when He commanded the Apostles to make disciples of all nations (Matt. 28:19). Thus St. Paul preaches, "For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body" (I Cor. 12:13). The Councils of Florence and of Trent, moreover, aptly call baptism the "door" through which we enter the Holy Church.²³

According to the will of Christ, baptism is necessary not only to enter the Church, but to enter heaven: "Amen, amen, I say to thee, unless a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God" (John 3:5). In this asseveration to Nicodemus, Christ unites all three senses of "the kingdom of God." The "kingdom of God" refers to the Catholic Church (Matt. 13:24, 31, 47); to the reign of God in the soul, that is, the presence of sanctifying grace (Matt. 13:33, 44, 45); and to heaven (Luke 22:29-30; Matt. 16: 25; Mk. 10:26). Hence Christ is saying that baptism is necessary for entrance into the Catholic Church; and for the reception of sanctifying grace; and for salvation, the entrance into heaven.

Following her Master, the Church teaches that baptism is necessary for salvation. The Council of Florence asserts: "And since through the first man death has come to all men, unless we are reborn of water and of the Holy Ghost, we cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven, as the Truth Himself tells us."²⁴

Trent solemnly asserts: "If anyone says that baptism is optional, that is, not necessary for salvation . . . let him be anathema."²⁵

Membership in the Church is also necessary for salvation. The axiom "Outside of the Church there is no salvation" is a revealed Truth. The Fourth Lateran Council (1215) declared: "Indeed, there is but one universal Church of the faithful outside of which no one at all is saved."²⁶ Pius IX, in his allocution Singulari Quadam (1854), declared that "It must, of course, be held as a matter of faith that outside the apostolic Roman Church no one can be saved."²⁷

Obviously, this revealed truth must be understood in the sense that the Church understands it. First, after expressing this revealed truth, Pius IX immediately added: "On the other hand, it must likewise be held as certain that those who are affected by ignorance of the true religion, if it is invincible ignorance, are not subject to any guilt in this matter before the eyes of the Lord."²⁸

Secondly, the "Letter of the Holy Office to the Archbishop of Boston" (1949), which was written to clarify the meaning of the axiom "Outside the Church there is no salvation," explains that actual membership in the Church is not absolutely necessary for salvation. One can be saved through a desire or wish to be a member, even if this desire is only implicit.²⁹ However, the Letter adds that not just any desire or longing suffices for salvation. The desire must be imbued by supernatural love and faith. "It is necessary that the desire by which a man is related to the Church be informed by perfect charity. And an implicit desire cannot have this effect unless a man has supernatural faith."³⁰

This desire, which is called baptism of desire, although truly baptism, is not a sacrament and does not have all the effects of the sacrament of baptism. For example, it does not imprint the sacramental character on the soul. Hence one does not become a member of the Church and is not entitled to receive the other sacraments. Baptism of desire, however, does remit original sin and all actual sin, and the eternal punishments due to sin. Moreover, it infuses sanctifying grace into the soul.

The other non-sacramental substitute for the sacrament of baptism, baptism of blood, is an act of martyrdom. It is voluntarily undergoing death, by virtue of confessing the Faith, at the hands of those who hate Christ. Original sin and all personal sins are remitted by baptism of blood, as well as all temporal punishment due to sin.

According to this catechism, baptism is nothing but "the sacrament of welcome" into the Church (pp. 5, 7). By "sacrament" this catechism does not mean a sacred outward sign or rite instituted by Christ to confer grace, but "a visible sign pointing out, declaring, proclaiming that something real exists behind the celebration and is the cause for the celebration" (p. 5) As this catechism puts it, "All the sacraments are celebrations of real life events" (ibid.). The catechism stresses that baptism is the "sacrament of welcome" into the "Christian Community." Consider: "Baptism is the external sign celebrating the entrance of a person into the total Christian Community as well as into a specific parish family. It is a party, a joyful celebration that welcomes a new-comer into the Community" (ibid.). "The reality being celebrated at baptism has to do with a real welcome into a very real family, a truly Christian Community" (ibid.). "Baptism, then, is the Christian Community welcoming and accepting the child at the invitation of the parents" (ibid.).

Furthermore, this catechism explains that "at baptism, changes are made"(p. 6). These changes, it adds are similar to those the baby undergoes when he is welcomed home from the hospital: Just as the baby is welcomed home from the hospital and the "family makes room for the newcomer," so "the Christian Community makes room for the baby who is welcomed into a special place." Just as "there is a real sense of responsibility for the health and happiness of the new one" in the family, so "the love and concern of the Christian Community will provide the best possible atmosphere for the growth and development of the newborn" (PP. 5,6).

These changes, this catechism maintains, are the only ones that occur at baptism. Baptism is not the sacrament of rebirth or regeneration; it does not remit original and personal sin; it does not remit temporal punishment due to sin; it does not confer sanctifying grace; it does not imprint a character; it does not unite the person to Christ; and it does not make on an heir of heaven.

As shown, this pernicious catechism resurrects the heresies of Pelagianism: Adam's sin injured only himself, not his posterity; original sin is passed on by imitation, not by propagation; death, suffering and concupiscence are natural occurrences, not punishments due to original sin; justification involves no interior sanctification of the soul; and, finally, baptism of infants does not remove original sin; it is merely a sign of acceptance into the Church.

Sprinkled with these heresies are others: Sacraments are not means by which grace is conferred; they are not efficacious signs, that is, signs that effect the grace which they signify; and the sacraments are not necessary for salvation.

According to its distributors, this catechism is used in 600 parishes throughout the United States. Moreover, its heretical statement that original sin is "the situation of the world into which we are born," is a position adhered to in Christ Among Us.³¹

Christ Among Us—a thoroughly heretical catechism that has been condemned by Rome—has sold approximately 1.7 million copies. The point is that Pelagianism, the last vestiges of which were stamped out by the Second Synod of Orange in 529, has resurrected in the Church.

1. Why Baptize Our Baby: An Open Letter to Christian Parents (Published by Community Ministry Office—Transfiguration Church, 4325 Jarvis Ave., San Jose, CA 95118. Copyright 1978, revised 1982).

2. Ibid., p. 8.

3. Denz. 2123; cited in The Church Teaches: Documents of the Church in English Translation by the Jesuit Fathers of St. Mary's College (Illinois, Tan Books, 1975), pp. 153-54. (All references to Denzinger and to the documents of the Church, save three that are duly noted, are taken from The Church Teaches.

4. Denz. 788. The Council of Trent, "Decree on Original Sin" (p. 158).

5. Denz. 833 (p. 206).

6. Denz. 3886: cited in The Christian Faith, edited by J. Neuner, S.J. and J. Dupuis, S.J. (Westminster: Christian Classics, Inc., 1975), p. 239.

7. Denz. 3 886; ibid.

8. Denz. 3886, ibid., p. 56.

9. Denz. 1792; The Church Teaches, p. 30.

10. Denz. 175 (p. 157).

11.    Denz. 790 (p. 159).

12. The Church Teaches, p. 163.

13. See, for example, Documents of the Christian Church, edited by Henry Bettenson (New York: Oxford University Press, 1975), p. 59.

14. Denz. 791 (p. 159).

15. Denz. 789 (p. 159).

16. Denz. 795 (p. 231).

17. Denz. 796 (pp. 231-32).

18. The Church Teaches (p. 164).

19.  Denz. 792 (p. 160); cf. also Denz. 696.

20. Denz. 799 (p. 233). The Council of Trent, "Decree on Justification."

21. Vatican I, "The First Draft of the Dogmatic Constitution on the Church of Christ" (p. 87).

22. Denz. 792: The Council of Trent, "Decree on Original Sin" (canon 5), (p. 160).

23. Denz. 696 (Council of Florence); Denz. 895 (Council of Trent), pp. 269 and 306).

24. Denz. 696 (p. 269).

25. Denz. 861 (p. 270).

26. Denz. 430 (p. 72).

27. Denz. 1647 (p. 80).

28. Denz. 1647 (pp. 80-81).

29. Denz. 3870; cited in The Christian Faith, (p. 236).

30. Denz. 3872; ibid, (p. 237).

31. Christ Among Us, by Anthony J. Wilhelm, (New York: Paulist Press, 1975), pp. 37-8: "This, then, is original sin: the effect of the sin of the first humans plus the accumulated sin of mankind. We all inherit this accumulation of mankind's defects, its lack of love, its ignorance and corruption.
"Just as a physical heredity and environment transmit certain defects to an infant, so everyone from the womb grows in a sinful moral environment...
'This 'sin' is 'original,' then, because it afflicts all of us at our origin, as well as having its inception at the origin of the human race. It is 'sin' for us only in an analogous sense, because we have not willed it."