Concupiscence

From New World Encyclopedia

Concupiscence usually refers to sexual desire or lust, derived from the Latin word concupiscentia meaning "a desire for worldly things." In its widest sense, concupiscence is any yearning of the soul; in its strict and specific sense, it means a desire of the lower appetite contrary to reason. The term has become especially important through discussions on the Christian concept of original sin, especially as developed by Augustine of Hippo.

For Protestants, concupiscence often refers to what they understand as the orientation, inclination or innate tendency of human beings to do evil.

There are nine occurrences of the word in the Douay-Rheims Bible: Wisdom 4:12, Romans 7:7, Romans 7:8, Colossians 3:5, Epistle of James 1:14, James 1:15, 2 Peter 1:4, and 1 John 2:17.

There are three occurrences of the word in the King James Bible: Romans 7:8, Colossians 3:5 and I Thessalonians 4:5.

Jewish background

In Judaism, a parallel concept to concupiscence is the yetzer hara (Hebrew: יצר הרע‎ for "evil inclination"), refering to the tendency to do evil by violating the will of God. Unlike in Christian theology, however, yetzer hara is not a demonic force nor the product of original sin, but a natural tendency to misuse things the physical body needs to survive. Thus, the need for food becomes gluttony, the natural urge to procreate leads to unethical sexual activity, etc. In Judaism, this tendency toward evil is a natural result of God's creation, and God gives his commandments in order to guide and help mankind to master the yetzer hara.

Christian view

The Catholic teaching on concupiscence developed in the context of the so-called Pelagian controversy of the late fourth century CE. Pelagius held that Christ had set a moral and spiritual example which other Christians could follow through ethical discipline to perfect their characters, in accordance with Jesus' command, "be perfect, as your Heavenly Father is perfect."

Augustine of Hippo countered this optimistic view with the doctrine of original sin, in which he taught that, through their sin Adam and Eve had passed on an innate tendency to sin—concupiscence— which could never be overcome be overcome by human effort, but required God's intervening grace for salvation. In opposition to Pelagius' perfectionist ideal, he appealed to such scriptures as Saint Paul's tortured question:

I see another law at work in the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner of the law of sin at work within my members. What a wretched man I am! Who will rescue me from this body of death? Thanks be to God—through Jesus Christ our Lord! (Romans 7:23-25)

The Catholic Church eventually declared Pelagianism to be heresy and adopted the Augustinian view. The Eastern Orthodox Church likewise rejected Pelagius, but went slightly less far than the Catholics, holding that while humans indeed inherited a sinful nature from Adam and Eve, they are nevertheless capable of theosis (become divinized) through a combination of God's grace and prayerful effort.

Catholic Teaching on Concupiscence

In contrast to the Jewish teaching that the yetzer harah was endowed by God to Adam and Eve (who had to overcome it by obeying God's commandments),the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) teaches that Adam and Eve were originally constituted in a state of holiness free from concupiscence (CCC 337). By sinning, however, Adam lost this original state, not only for himself but for all human beings (CCC 416). However, human nature has not been totally corrupted; rather, it has only been weakened and wounded, subject to ignorance, suffering, death, and an irrestible inclination to sin (CCC 405, 418). This inclination toward sin and evil is called "concupiscence" (CCC 405, 418). Baptism (preceded by repentance) erases original sin and turns a person back toward God. The inclination toward sin and evil persists, however, and the original sin is passed on to one's children through the sexual act. Sex, while not evil in itself, is to be avoided except for purposes of procreation. Even after baptism, the struggle against concupiscence continues (CCC 2520) until Christ comes again to redeem mankind completely.


A Theory on The Difference Between Catholic and Protestant Views

The primary difference between Catholic and Protestant theology on the issue of concupiscence is that Protestants consider concupiscence to be sinful, whereas Catholics believe it to be highly likely to cause sin, though not sinful in itself.[citation needed]

This difference is intimately tied with the different traditions on original sin. Protestantism holds that the original prelapsarian nature of humanity was an innate tendency to good; the special relationship Adam and Eve enjoyed with God was due not to some supernatural gift, but to their own natures. Hence, in the Protestant view, the Fall was not the destruction of a supernatural gift, leaving humanity's nature to work unimpeded, but rather the corruption of that nature itself. Since the present nature of humans is corrupted from their original nature, it follows that it is not good, but rather evil (although some good may still remain). Thus, in the Protestant view, concupiscence is evil in itself.

Catholicism, by contrast, teaches that humanity's original nature is good (CCC 374). This condition is referred to as original righteousness. After the Fall this gift was lost, (see original sin) but in the Catholic view, human nature cannot be called evil, because it still remains a natural creation of God. Despite the fact that sin usually results, Catholic theology teaches that human nature itself is not the cause of sin, although once it comes into contact with sin it may produce more sin, just as a flammable substance may be easily ignited by a fire.

The difference in views also extends to the relationship between concupiscence and original sin. In the Protestant view, original sin is concupiscence inherited from Adam and Eve. It is never fully eliminated in this life, although sanctifying grace helps to eliminate it gradually. Since concupiscence is not evil in the Catholic view, it cannot be original sin. Rather, original sin is the real and actual sin of Adam, passed on to his descendants; rather than remaining until death (or in the case of the damned, for all eternity), it can be removed by the sacrament of baptism. (For more information, see original sin.)

Another reason for the differing views of Protestants and Catholics on concupiscence is their position on sin in general. Protestants (or at least the magisterial reformers; some modern-day Protestants would not accept this position) hold that one can be guilty of sin even if it is not voluntary; Catholics, by contrast, traditionally believe that one is subjectively guilty of sin only when the sin is voluntary. The Scholastics and magisterial reformers have different views on the issue of what is voluntary and what is not: the Catholic Scholastics considered the emotions of love, hate, like and dislike to be acts of will or choice, while the Protestant reformers did not. The Bible specifies that attitudes as well as actions may be sinful. By the Catholic position that one's attitudes are acts of will, sinful attitudes are voluntary. By the magisterial reformer view that these attitudes are involuntary, some sins are involuntary as well. Since man's nature (and therefore concupiscence) is not voluntarily chosen, Catholics do not consider it to be sinful; the reformers believe that, since some sins are involuntary, it can be.

Protestants believe that concupiscence is sinful, indeed, they believe it to be the primary type of sin; thus they most often refer to it simply as sin, or, to distinguish it from particular sinful acts, as "man's sinful nature." Thus, concupiscence as a distinct term is more likely to be used by Catholics.

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  • Robert Merrihew Adams, "Original Sin: A Study in the Interaction of Philosophy and Theology," p. 80ff in Francis J. Ambrosio (ed.), The Question of Christian Philosophy Today, Fordham University Press (New York: 1999), Perspectives in Continental Philosophy no. 9.
  • Joseph A. Komonchak, Mary Collins, and Dermot A. Lane, eds., The New Dictionary of Theology (Wilmington, Delaware : Michael Glazier, Inc., 1987), p. 220.

See also

  • Incurvatus in se
  • Prevenient Grace
  • Seven deadly sins
  • Sin

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.