Interestingly, in the Middle Ages, the sages and heroes of antiquity, such as Plato and Alexander the Great, were revered. According to the tradition, Christ descended into Hell and freed various people, mainly Adam and Eve, the Patriarchs, Moses and the prophets, and heroes like Esther. Some people went so far as to imagine that the gentile sages and heroes were also taken from Hell in that event. Others, like Dante, supposed that there was a sort of "Elysian fields" section of Hell set up for these people, who then basked in the light of virtue and reason, but were deprived of the Beatific Vision. In short, the Church early on considered the doctrine of Original Sin to be compatible with having heroes.
Of course, there are various versions of Original Sin. The Catholic Church does not accept the doctrine of Total Depravity which Calvin put forth. It is more like a moral infirmity, that makes it impossible to be free of sin, even though human nature is not wholly corrupt. Of course, there is a problem: if we can't help it, how can we be held accountable? The answer seems to be that whether it is our fault or not, it is our imperfection, and therefore we are not fit, on our own merit, to have an intimate relationship with God.
Nevertheless, the other side of the coin is that there is a sympathy for the moral trials that people go through, and for the foibles to which all are subject. We live in a sort of comic brotherhood of sin: like Lucy, we all got some 'splaining to do. Against this backdrop, the virtue that is achieved, the human greatness, is all the more appreciated, in fact. Just as we give a kid credit for having risen from the projects to become a doctor, so we give human beings a lot of credit when they are great despite their flawed humanity.
Anyway, that is how I understand the idea to play out...... |
