Wikipedia

Peccatism

Peccatism is the belief that human beings are inherently sinful and need divine redemption, a conviction closely tied to the Christian doctrine of original sin. It is an analytical term from comparative theology; it is not used within Christianity as a self-description.[1]

The Christian doctrine of original sin holds that humanity inherited a fallen nature from the first humans, Adam and Eve, and that redemption comes through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. The term peccatism has been used to set this teaching against the views of human nature found in Islam and Judaism.[1]

Etymology

edit

The word "peccatism" comes from the Latin peccatum, meaning "sin".[2] The root "pecc-" appears in other English words, among them "peccant", for something sinful or morally wrong, and "impeccable", for something without fault.[3] The suffix "-ism" denotes a doctrine or belief system.[4][5] In this sense the word was coined in 1967 by the Muslim philosopher Isma'il Raji al-Faruqi, who joined the suffix to the Latin root to name the belief in the inherent sinfulness of human beings and paired it with a companion coinage, saviourism.[6]

The Christian doctrine of sin

edit

In Christian theology sin is the central problem facing humanity. It covers acts, thoughts, and intentions that fall outside moral and divine standards, and the tradition gives it many names, among them iniquity, corruption, rebellion, and evil.[7]

One definition treats sin as any attitude or act by which a person rebels against the love commandment of Jesus, or fails to answer it.[8] On the same account, sin is self-love and self-centeredness, and a person counts as a sinner before God only with enough maturity, knowledge, and freedom to make moral choices.[8]

Christian writing names many forms of sin. Transgression is the breaking of a rule or law.[9] Witchcraft, the practice of magic, counts as sin,[10] as does abomination, the doing of detestable acts.[11] Wickedness shows itself in evil conduct,[12] unrighteousness in unfair or unjust dealing,[13] and immorality in unethical behavior.[14] Sin also takes in omission, the failure to do what is right;[15] the entertaining of impure thoughts;[16] and unbelief, the absence of faith in God.[17]

Original sin

edit

The doctrine of original sin holds that humanity inherited a fallen nature from the first humans, Adam and Eve.[18] Augustine of Hippo was the first writer to use the Latin phrase peccatum originale, in his polemics against the Pelagians, although the underlying idea had been worked out earlier by Irenaeus of Lyons during the 2nd-century dispute with Gnosticism.[19][20]

In the Eastern Orthodox tradition the inherited condition is usually called ancestral sin: the East assigns personal guilt to Adam and Eve alone and treats mortality, rather than inherited guilt, as what passes to their descendants.[21][22]

Historical development

edit

Sin has been a core theme in Christianity from its earliest period, though Christian writers have not agreed on how far it reaches into human nature.

Apostolic Fathers and the early church

edit

The earliest Christian writers, the Apostolic Fathers, did not treat sin as an inherent or overwhelming feature of human nature. For them sin came through personal choice, and reason and moral effort had a real part in salvation.[23] Justin Martyr and the Greek Fathers held that human beings keep the freedom to do good after the fall, a position later set against the idea of total depravity.[20] John E. Toews argues that the doctrine of inherited sin, as it came to be taught in the West, has thin support in the Genesis text and little presence in the Apostolic Fathers.[24]

Augustine and the Pelagian controversy

edit

In the early 5th century the British monk Pelagius taught that human beings can take the first step toward salvation by their own effort, without a prior gift of grace.[25] Augustine opposed him, holding that sin had so weakened the will that no one could turn to God without grace.[26] Augustine read original sin as a nature inherited by every human through the fall of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden.[27] His position carried into both Roman Catholic and Protestant theology and shaped Western Christianity for centuries.[28]

Conciliar definitions

edit

The Council of Carthage of 418 set the Augustinian view against Pelagius. Its canons affirmed that Adam's sin brought death to his descendants and that infants are baptized for the remission of an inherited fault.[29] More than eleven centuries later the Council of Trent, at its fifth session on 17 June 1546, issued a decree on original sin with five canons. The decree condemned the Pelagian denial of inherited sin and also rejected the Protestant teaching that baptism does not remove it.[30][31]

The Reformation

edit

During the 16th-century Reformation, Martin Luther and John Calvin pressed the doctrine of original sin further. In On the Bondage of the Will (1525) Luther argued, against Erasmus, that the unredeemed will can choose only sin.[32] Calvin's doctrine of total depravity holds that sin reaches through the whole of human nature and that people cannot reach righteousness on their own.[33][34] The Synod of Dort (1618–1619) restated this teaching in the canons later summarized by the acronym TULIP, though scholars caution that the acronym distorts both the canons and Calvin's own thought.[35][36]

Gnostic interpretations

edit

Gnosticism held a position of its own. On the Gnostic account the material world is the work of a lesser and malevolent creator, the demiurge, and salvation comes through gnosis, saving knowledge, rather than through moral conduct or atonement.[37][38] Elaine Pagels notes that several Gnostic texts present Christ as a revealer of hidden knowledge rather than as a redeemer from sin.[39]

Redemption and atonement

edit

Christian teaching holds that God requires sinless perfection, a life kept wholly free of sin;[40] a blood sacrifice offered in atonement;[41] and faith, trust in God's plan for salvation.[42] These point to the weight Christianity places on the sacrificial death and resurrection of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins.[43]

In Christianity the cross is the central symbol. It stands for Jesus's death as a substitutionary atonement for the sins of humanity.[44] Christians hold that Jesus, himself sinless, took the punishment for human sin and so opened redemption and the promise of eternal life to those who have faith in him.[45] Christian writers have explained the atonement in more than one way. Anselm of Canterbury, in Cur Deus Homo (c. 1098), framed it as satisfaction owed to God's honor.[46] Gustaf Aulén later distinguished this satisfaction model, the penal substitution model, and an older "Christus Victor" model in which the death of Christ defeats the powers of sin and death.[47]

Al-Faruqi's concept of peccatism

edit

In Christian Ethics: A Historical and Systematic Analysis of Its Dominant Ideas (1967), completed at McGill University, al-Faruqi used peccatism for the conviction that sin is a standing condition of human nature, and saviourism for the matching conviction that humanity therefore needs a divine savior.[6][1] On his reading the two ideas entered Christian teaching after the time of Jesus and turned an original ethical message into what he called Christianism.[48]

According to David Marshall, al-Faruqi treated belief in original sin as the heart of what he meant by peccatism, and held that it cut against human moral autonomy.[1] Al-Faruqi judged that making sin a precondition of God's dealings with humanity verged on blasphemy, and he called on Christians to undertake a "Second Reformation" that would recover the teaching of Jesus.[49]

Reception

edit

Al-Faruqi's analysis has been examined and contested. F. Peter Ford reads it as a Christian-facing argument that Islam preserves a message Christianity lost.[48] Ng Kam Weng questions whether the account represents Christian doctrine fairly.[50] Christian theologians have defended the doctrine of original sin as a realistic account of universal moral failure and as the presupposition of grace, and they distinguish the inherited condition from personal guilt, a distinction the Eastern churches draw sharply.[19][21]

Comparative context

edit

Al-Faruqi developed the idea of peccatism as a contrast with the Islamic view of human nature, and later writers have drawn similar comparisons with Judaism.[1]

Islam

edit

Islam has no doctrine of inherited sin. According to Yasien Mohamed, it teaches that every person is born in a state of natural purity, the fitra, and sins only by later choice.[51] The Qur'an calls the believer to the fitra of God upon which humanity was created.[52] A widely transmitted hadith holds that every child is born upon the fitra and is then shaped by its upbringing.[53] In Islamic teaching Adam's lapse in the garden is treated as a personal error, forgiven after repentance, with no guilt passed to his descendants.[51]

Judaism

edit

Rabbinic Judaism explains the human capacity for wrongdoing through the yetzer hara, the evil inclination, set against the yetzer hatov, the good inclination, rather than through inherited guilt.[54] The tradition stresses free will and personal responsibility, holding that a person may master the inclination toward sin.[54]

See also

edit

References

edit
  1. 1 2 3 4 5 Marshall, David (2006). "Heavenly Religion or Unbelief? Muslim Perspectives on Christianity". Anvil. 23 (2): 89–100. Al-Faruqi argues that the corruption of the original message of Jesus into Christianism is seen most clearly in the introduction into the New Testament and then into traditional Christian doctrine of two false principles for which he coins the terms 'peccatism' and 'saviourism'. By 'peccatism' he essentially means belief in original sin.
  2. ↑ Lewis, Charlton T.; Short, Charles (1879). "peccatum". A Latin Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  3. ↑ "Peccant". Online Etymology Dictionary. Douglas Harper. c. 1600. Retrieved 14 July 2024.
  4. ↑ "-ism". Online Etymology Dictionary. Douglas Harper. Retrieved 11 October 2025.
  5. ↑ "-ism". The Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford University Press. 2009. ISBN 9780199573158. Forming nouns denoting a system, principle, or ideological movement.
  6. 1 2 al-Faruqi, Isma'il Raji (1967). Christian Ethics: A Historical and Systematic Analysis of Its Dominant Ideas. Montreal: McGill University Press. pp. 71–87, 114–128.
  7. ↑ Plantinga, Cornelius Jr. (1995). Not the Way It's Supposed to Be: A Breviary of Sin. Eerdmans Publishing. p. 22. ISBN 9780802842183.
  8. 1 2 Harkness, Georgia Elma (1952). Christian Ethics. Nashville, TN: Abingdon Press. p. 95.
  9. ↑ Ricoeur, Paul (1967). The Symbolism of Evil. Beacon Press. p. 45. ISBN 9780807015674. OCLC 22867775.
  10. ↑ Levack, Brian P. (2015). The Witch-Hunt in Early Modern Europe. Routledge. p. 67. ISBN 9781138808102.
  11. ↑ Boyarin, Daniel (1995). Carnal Israel: Reading Sex in Talmudic Culture. University of California Press. p. 90.
  12. ↑ Cavanaugh, William T. (2009). The Myth of Religious Violence: Secular Ideology and the Roots of Modern Conflict. Oxford University Press. p. 123. ISBN 9780195385045.
  13. ↑ Plantinga, Cornelius Jr. (1995). Not the Way It's Supposed to Be: A Breviary of Sin. Eerdmans Publishing. p. 64. ISBN 9780802842183.
  14. ↑ Niebuhr, Reinhold (1996). The Nature and Destiny of Man: A Christian Interpretation. Westminster John Knox Press. p. 87. ISBN 9780664257095.
  15. ↑ Milgrom, Jacob (2021). Leviticus 17-22: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Yale University Press. p. 108. ISBN 9780300262001.
  16. ↑ Foucault, Michel (1990). The History of Sexuality, Volume 1: An Introduction. Vintage Books. p. 142. ISBN 9780679724698.
  17. ↑ Smith, Wilfred Cantwell (1998). Faith and Belief: The Difference Between Them. Oneworld Publications. p. 78. ISBN 9781851681655.
  18. ↑ Niebuhr, Reinhold (1996). The Nature and Destiny of Man: A Christian Interpretation. Westminster John Knox Press. p. 55. ISBN 9780664257095.
  19. 1 2 McGrath, Alister E. (2016). Christian Theology: An Introduction (6th ed.). Wiley-Blackwell. pp. 348–351. ISBN 9781118869574.
  20. 1 2 Kelly, J. N. D. (1978). Early Christian Doctrines (Revised ed.). HarperOne. pp. 166–174. ISBN 9780060643340. {{cite book}}: Check |isbn= value: checksum (help)
  21. 1 2 Meyendorff, John (1979). Byzantine Theology: Historical Trends and Doctrinal Themes. Fordham University Press. p. 144. ISBN 9780823209677. {{cite book}}: Check |isbn= value: checksum (help)
  22. ↑ Romanides, John S. (2002). The Ancestral Sin. Translated by George S. Gabriel. Zephyr Publishing. ISBN 9780970201515.
  23. ↑ al-Faruqi, Isma'il (1968). C. J. Bleeker (ed.). Original Sin in the Apostolic Fathers. Proceedings of the XIth International Congress of the International Association for the History of Religions, vol. II, Guilt or Pollution and Rites of Purification. Leiden: Brill. pp. 93–94.
  24. ↑ Toews, John E. (2013). The Story of Original Sin. Pickwick Publications. ISBN 9781610978789. {{cite book}}: Check |isbn= value: checksum (help)
  25. ↑ Rees, B. R. (1988). Pelagius: A Reluctant Heretic. Boydell Press. ISBN 9780851155142.
  26. ↑ Brown, Peter (2000). Augustine of Hippo: A Biography. University of California Press. p. 78. ISBN 9780520227576.
  27. ↑ Augustine (426). The City of God. Penguin Classics. p. 15. ISBN 9780140448948. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
  28. ↑ Pelikan, Jaroslav (1971). The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100–600). The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine. Vol. 1. University of Chicago Press. pp. 299–300.
  29. ↑ Denzinger, Heinrich (1957). The Sources of Catholic Dogma. Translated by Roy J. Deferrari from the 30th edition of Enchiridion Symbolorum. St. Louis: B. Herder. nos. 101–108.
  30. ↑ The Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent. Fifth Session, Decree Concerning Original Sin (17 June 1546), translated by J. Waterworth. London: Dolman. 1848.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link)
  31. ↑ Kirsch, Johann Peter (1912). "Council of Trent". The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 15. New York: Robert Appleton Company.
  32. ↑ Luther, Martin (1957) [1525]. The Bondage of the Will. Translated by J. I. Packer and O. R. Johnston. Grand Rapids: Fleming H. Revell.
  33. ↑ Calvin, John (1960) [1559]. Institutes of the Christian Religion. Vol. 1. Edited by John T. McNeill, translated by Ford Lewis Battles. Westminster John Knox Press. Book II, chapters 1–3.
  34. ↑ Muller, Richard A. (2000). The Unaccommodated Calvin: Studies in the Foundation of a Theological Tradition. Oxford University Press. p. 166. ISBN 9780195151688. Human beings are 'not deprived of will' (non voluntate privatus) but they are deprived of soundness of will (voluntatis sanitate).
  35. ↑ Pelikan, Jaroslav; Hotchkiss, Valerie, eds. (2003). Creeds and Confessions of Faith in the Christian Tradition. Yale University Press. ISBN 9780300093896.
  36. ↑ Muller, Richard A. (2012). Calvin and the Reformed Tradition. Baker Academic. pp. 50–62. ISBN 9780801048760.
  37. ↑ Jonas, Hans (2001). The Gnostic Religion: The Message of the Alien God and the Beginnings of Christianity (3rd ed.). Beacon Press. ISBN 9780807058015.
  38. ↑ Rudolph, Kurt (1987). Gnosis: The Nature and History of Gnosticism. Harper & Row. ISBN 9780060670184.
  39. ↑ Pagels, Elaine (1979). The Gnostic Gospels. Random House. ISBN 9780394502786.
  40. ↑ Bonhoeffer, Dietrich (1959). The Cost of Discipleship. NY: Collier Books. p. 35. OCLC 1028575481.
  41. ↑ Westermann, Claus (1980). The Promises to the Fathers: Studies on the Patriarchal Narratives. Fortress Press. p. 50. ISBN 9780800605339.
  42. ↑ Tillich, Paul (1957). Dynamics of Faith. Harper & Row. p. 77. ISBN 9780060937133. {{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
  43. ↑ Stott, John R.W. (2006). The Cross of Christ. InterVarsity Press. p. 98. ISBN 9780830833207.
  44. ↑ Green, Joel B. (1988). The Death of Jesus: Tradition and Interpretation in the Passion Narrative. Mohr Siebeck. p. 36. ISBN 9783161574542.
  45. ↑ McGrath, Alister E. (2016). Christian Theology: An Introduction. Wiley-Blackwell. p. 112. ISBN 9781118869574.
  46. ↑ Anselm of Canterbury (1998) [c. 1098]. "Cur Deus Homo". The Major Works. Edited by Brian Davies and G. R. Evans. Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780192825254.
  47. ↑ Aulén, Gustaf (1931). Christus Victor: An Historical Study of the Three Main Types of the Idea of Atonement. Translated by A. G. Hebert. London: SPCK.
  48. 1 2 Ford, F. Peter (1993). "Isma'il al-Faruqi on Muslim–Christian Dialogue: An Analysis from a Christian Perspective". Islam and Christian–Muslim Relations. 4 (2). doi:10.1080/09596419308721011.
  49. ↑ al-Faruqi, Isma'il Raji (1967). Christian Ethics: A Historical and Systematic Analysis of Its Dominant Ideas. Montreal: McGill University Press. pp. 313–314.
  50. ↑ Ng, Kam Weng (2023). "A Critique of Ismail Faruqi's Metareligion and Ethical Analysis of Christianity". Kairos Research Centre. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |url= (help)
  51. 1 2 Mohamed, Yasien (1996). Fitrah: The Islamic Concept of Human Nature. London: Ta-Ha Publishers. ISBN 9781897940563.
  52. ↑ Quran 30:30
  53. ↑ Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī. ḥadīth 1358.; Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. ḥadīth 2658.
  54. 1 2 Urbach, Ephraim E. (1987). The Sages: Their Concepts and Beliefs. Translated by Israel Abrahams. Harvard University Press. pp. 471–483. ISBN 9780674785809.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Peccatism&oldid=1357762192"