REPLACING ORIGINAL SIN WITH PRAYERFUL HOPE AS CATHOLIC THEOLOGY'S RESPONSE TO THE PROBLEM OF EVIL A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of The School of Continuing Studies and of The Graduate School of Arts and Sciences in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Liberal Studies By Adav Noti, J.D. Georgetown University Washington, DC December 1, 2008 REPLACING ORIGINAL SIN WITH PRAYERFUL HOPE AS CATHOLIC THEOLOGY'S RESPONSE TO THE PROBLEM OF EVIL Adav Noti, J.D. Mentor: Chester Gillis, Ph.D. ABSTRACT The theological problem of evil poses a substantial challenge to all monotheistic faith traditions. In Roman Catholic theology, the primary response to the problem of evil is the doctrine of original sin. According to this doctrine, human suffering is attributable to a putatively historical event: The first people, Adam and Eve, introduced disorder into creation by disobeying a divine command. This disorder transformed human existence from a state of “original justice,” in which humanity experienced neither death nor suffering, to a state of original sin, in which each person is inclined toward sinful activity and vulnerable to harm. The state of original sin is transmitted from parent to child at conception, and, although baptism erases the metaphysical taint of Adam and Eve’s deed, the concrete effects of original sin are permanent, subjecting each person to a lifetime of moral error, physical hardship, and certain death. In the thesis that follows, I demonstrate that the doctrine of original sin is theologically deficient, that it conflicts with other Church teachings, and that it inflicts harm on both the faith community and the Church itself. As a result, I argue that the Church should cease employing original sin in response to the problem of evil. In place of original sin, I propose adopting a theological concept that I entitle “prayerful hope.” ii This concept — which is derived from the Church’s recent reanalysis of the doctrine of limbo — argues that those who suffer should challenge God through prayer to end their suffering, and the Church should explain to the faithful that there is good reason to believe that such prayers will be answered. I demonstrate that this teaching would correct the theological errors that pervade the doctrine of original sin, would be consistent with all major Church doctrines, and would take a significant step toward ameliorating the damage that original sin has wreaked on the Church and its followers. I conclude by demonstrating that the Church could replace original sin with prayerful hope at little cost to the Church’s magisterial authority, and I recommend a specific procedure for effecting this long overdue theological change. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My deepest appreciation to Dean Chester Gillis for his expertise, for his encouragement, and for the time and effort he devoted to substantially improving this thesis. My heartfelt thanks also to Professor Tod Linafelt, who opened my eyes to the possibilities of the Book of Job, and to Professor Mike Duggan, who helped narrow the scope of my examination from impossible to merely unmanageable. I am truly grateful to Bob Parker, David Kolker, and Kevin Deeley for allowing me to keep my day job while I theologized by night. And I cannot thank Adrienne Lockie enough for serving as a constant reminder that there is infinitely more to the human condition than the experience of evils: O felix culpa, quae talem ac tantum meruit habere redemptorem . This thesis is dedicated to those who suffer. iv CONTENTS ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................... iv INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER ONE. THE PROBLEM OF EVIL .............................................................. 6 A. The Problem of Evil Defined ........................................................................ 6 B. Characteristics of God ................................................................................ 10 C. Evil Defined ................................................................................................ 14 CHAPTER TWO. THE CHURCH’S RESPONSE: ORIGINAL SIN ....................... 25 CHAPTER THREE. FLAWS IN THE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN ................ 38 A. Acknowledged Doctrinal Deficiencies ....................................................... 39 B. Additional Doctrinal Deficiencies .............................................................. 49 C. Conflicts With Other Church Doctrines ..................................................... 54 D. Harms Caused by the Original Sin Doctrine .............................................. 66 CHAPTER FOUR. THE NEW DOCTRINE: PRAYERFUL HOPE ........................ 84 A. The Hope of Salvation ................................................................................ 85 B. Applying Prayerful Hope to the Problem of Evil ....................................... 91 CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................... 102 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...................................................................................................... 106 v INTRODUCTION The inability to understand “original sin” and to make it understandable is really one of the most difficult problems of present-day theology and pastoral ministry. — Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, The Ratzinger Report “The problem of evil” is an unfortunate euphemism, a misnomer with a long history of unhappy effects. The name suggests a dilemma to be resolved or a conflict to be settled. The problem of evil, however, is not a dilemma, but a paradox: It is the irreconcilable contradiction between the simultaneous existence of earthly suffering and an omnipotent, benevolent deity. As such, it resides at the core of human self- contemplation, inextricably intertwined with the ultimate questions of our creation, existence, and death. The problem of evil is the great puzzle of theology, and it has been studied for so long and with such fervent intensity that scholars’ continuing ability to produce new thoughts on the subject is, perhaps above all else, a striking testament to human ingenuity. Many analyses of the problem of evil, however, are of dubious practicality. A great many of them are devoted simply to rehashing traditional arguments — theodicies that have remained essentially unchanged for centuries. There is, by now, little more to be said in their defense. Anti-religionist critiques do not fare any better; using the problem of evil to highlight certain logical flaws in the dogmas of Christianity and other monotheistic faith traditions is a well-worn path. Though the sheer quantity 1 of material on each side of this ancient and unsolvable debate is staggering, 1 the ideas therein have grown stagnant. In recent years, however, two movements have arisen in the study of the problem of evil, each with the potential to generate genuinely new and practical approaches to the issue. The first movement comprises those who examine the problem of evil in light of developments in non-theological fields, such as biology or physics. 2 While this would be an unremarkable development in many academic areas — where external developments have been incorporated, to varying degrees, for decades or centuries — the analysis of the problem of evil had proven largely resistant to such efforts. This resistance seems now to have weakened, and important, relevant schools of thought that theodicists have long neglected are finally being brought to bear on the problem. The second movement — perhaps too small as yet to warrant that term — takes a substantially different approach. These scholars have suggested that the entire endeavor of theodicy should be abandoned, not simply because the problem of evil cannot be solved, but also because the development, propagation, and substance of 1. One bibliography of writings regarding the problem of evil contains 4,237 references, which averages to roughly three new works per week, every week, for thirty years. Barry L. Whitney, Theodicy: An Annotated Bibliography on the Problem of Evil, 1960-1990 (New York: Garland, 1993). 2. Examples include Daryl P. Domning and Monika K. Hellwig, Original Selfishness: Original Sin and Evil in the Light of Evolution (Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2006); Nancey Murphy, Robert John Russell, and William R. Stoeger, eds., Physics and Cosmology: Scientific Perspectives on the Problem of Natural Evil (Vatican: Vatican Observatory, 2007). 2 theodicies themselves have negative effects on the faith community. 3 In other words, they argue that the solution does more harm that the problem. In the thesis that follows, I seek primarily to add to the latter category of scholarship. Specifically, I examine the doctrine of original sin, which is the Roman Catholic Church’s primary theological response to the problem of evil. I argue that original sin, although it is a teaching of ancient pedigree and longstanding tradition, is irredeemably false, harmful to the faith of Catholics worldwide, and damaging to the Church itself. It relies on obsolete interpretations of scripture, conflicts with numerous other Church doctrines, is infused with centuries of misogyny, and seriously calls into question the authority and infallibility of the Church’s dogmatic