Original Sin removed at baptism?


The subject of “Original Sin” came up here

I didn’t want to derail the thread more, so I started this thread.
I’m really confused now on what is “removed” at baptism.

Yes I know “Original Sin” is removed, but what is it really? I know that Original Sin is NOT a personal sin. There is one poster that has this to say:

“Original sin” is the sin of Adam, when he broke the relationship of the human race with God by disobeying His command not to eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Becasue of Adam’s disobedience, everyone now is born into the state of not having a relationship with God, which we call “Original Sin.”

Later in the thread the same person wrote this:

The natural inclination to sin is called concupiscence. It is a side effect of Original Sin, but it is not, itself Original Sin. It is also not washed away at Baptism.

Original Sin is the lack of a relationship with God. Baptism restores us to a relationship with God, through the Church.

I’ve done some more reading and I have found how the natural inclination to sin called concupiscence, and it is the consequence from Original Sin.

However is Original Sin itself really being born into NO relationship with God? This to me does not seem right seeing God give us our souls at the moment of our conception.

I’ve looked up this question in the Compendium: Catechism of the Catholic Church.

76. What is Original Sin?
Original sin, in which all human beings are born, is the state of deprivation of original holiness and justice. It is a sin “contracted” by us not “committed”; it is a state of birth and not a personal act. Because of the original unity of all human beings, it is transmitted to the descendants of Adam “not by imitation, but by propagation”. This transmission remains a mystery which we cannot fully understand.

Source: vatican.va/archive/compendium_ccc/documents/archive_2005_compendium-ccc_en.html#God%20Comes%20to%20Meet%20Man

Does deprivation of original holiness and justice mean NO relationship with God? Or Lack of a relationship with God?


Hi Mommy,

Original sin is not a personal sin. It is the consequence of our first parents’ fall when we lost God’s friendship. So it is the state of not enjoying God’s friendship. Baptism restores us to God’s friendship, makes us adopted children of God and heirs to heaven.



So are you saying that the phrase “state of deprivation of original holiness and justice” (from the Compendium {see first post}) means we are in a state of NOT enjoying God’s friendship?


It is a state of being: original sin means we do not have the life of Grace (sanctifying grace) within us. Baptism restores that. It does not fully restore our fallen nature to what it was before–we shall have that fully in heaven.


Does lack of Grace (sanctifying grace) mean NO relationship with God and/or NO friendship with God?


Not at all. Adam and Eve had a relationship with God even after original sin, even though they were denied immediate entry into heaven and had to suffer the effects of sin.

Likewise, it is not that the unbaptized have NO relationship with God. But they have in effect been dis-inherited by their parents. They need to be restored to grace through baptism and incorporation into the Church. (It is noted that this may also happen through baptisme of desire.)


Thank-you that exactly what I was thinking… I just got confused when I started to read other posters saying things like Original Sin is NOT having a relationship with God and/or NOT being in HIS friendship.

Do you happen to understand what the phrase “state of deprivation of original holiness and justice” means?

I’m still a little bit lost on what that means…

Again it came from the Compendium (link provided in first post)


Adam and Eve were created with a human nature that was not “fallen.” Now, they did not have the beatific vision; they did not see God “face to face.” (That would mean they were in heaven.)

But they did have some things we don’t, such as:

Integrity. Meaning that their emotions and desires were always in accord with their will. They didn’t have the tendency toward sin (or concupiscience) that we do.

Freedom from suffering, which might be restated as bodily integrity.

Their intellect saw things clearly.

When they succumbed to sin, they lost those gifts, as well as sanctifying grace.

So their heirs–us–have a tendency toward sin, our desires are disordered-- not perfectly directed by our will, our intellects are darkened. Grace restores us to the family of God, but not the other gifts.


Adam and Eve were created perfect by God and placed by him in a garden – Paradise, if you will. The Church teaches that they were real people. This garden was not heaven, but a paradise where they were protected from harm and had everything they needed. They had all the **natural **gifts man could have, plus preternatural gifts given them by God. These preternatural gifts enabled them, unlike us, to have complete control over their wills, intellect and emotions. Under God’s special protection, they need never have sinned, or become sick or even die, God’s plan being to take them to himself in heaven when their lives were through (somewhat like what we believe about Mary by virtue of her Immaculate Conception and Assumption into heaven). Adam was thus the perfect representative of us all, possessing every advantage.

There was a test involved, however, which we all know they failed. In this test they were representing all of mankind as it’s perfect representatives. It was a test of their free wills, without which no one can truly love anyone else, including God. As a result of this failure, man lost paradise and all the preternatural gifts (which resulted in the loss of “original justice”). This resulted in the loss of control over his natural gifts. This is what we call “original sin” --not so much the sin itself, but it’s result. Since that time, of course, each man has compounded this failure by personal sin upon sin (Jesus and Mary being the only exceptions).

Thanks be to God who, in his mercy, sent us a Saviour, Jesus Christ, who through his sacrifice on the Cross reversed Adam’s failure, paid for our sins and made is possible for us, through faith and baptism, to be restored to fellowship with God. Just as the naturally and preternaturally perfect Adam was our representative, so Christ was our perfect representative (Romans 5:12-19). If we have no objection to Christ representing us, we should not object that Adam did the same.

Through faith and our obedience in God’s grace, we can one day be with God in heaven as was his plan all along.


Hi Mommy,

Thank-you that exactly what I was thinking… I just got confused when I started to read other posters saying things like Original Sin is NOT having a relationship with God and/or NOT being in HIS friendship

Well, l hope you’re not thinking that our relationship is the same
before and after baptism. Here from the Catechism of the Catholic Church:

1990 Justification detaches man from sin which contradicts the love of God, and purifies his heart of sin. Justification follows upon God’s merciful initiative of offering forgiveness. It reconciles man with God. It frees from the enslavement to sin, and it heals.

1992 Justification has been merited for us by the Passion of Christ who offered himself on the cross as a living victim, holy and pleasing to God, and whose blood has become the instrument of atonement for the sins of all men. Justification is conferred in Baptism, the sacrament of faith. It conforms us to the righteousness of God, who makes us inwardly just by the power of his mercy. Its purpose is the glory of God and of Christ, and the gift of eternal life:40

If we need to be reconciled with God, does it not mean that we need to become friends again? And does not baptism restore that friendship?



No I don’t think it’s the “same” relationship.

Relationship evolved and change.

The relationship I have with God is different today then say 3 years ago.

I also know for sure that the relationship I have today with God is different from the relationship I had at my baptism and yet before my baptism.

There is a big difference between having a relationship (no matter how imperfect) and having NO relationship.

Wouldn’t you agree?

God Bless


Reconcile has many meanings however I believe that this one best fit: “To reestablish a close relationship, as in marriage” (The estranged couple reconciled after a year.)
Source: dictionary.reference.com/browse/reconciled

Estranged couples have a relationship! It not a “perfect” relationship! It a relationship that is harden, it needs healing, and love. If the couple can find healing and love they can reconcile and share that bond they had when they said “I DO”.

Those couples that do reconcile have to have some sort of friendship….

How else would they reconcile?


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.