User Contributed Dictionary
Etymology
From etyl la concupiscens (stem concupiscent-), present participle of concupisco, inchoative of concupio < con- + cupio.Quotations
- 1894 — Plato's The
Republic, Book VIII, translated by Benjamin
Jowett
- Is not such an one likely to seat the concupiscent and covetous element on the vacant throne and to suffer it to play the great king within him, girt with tiara and chain and scimitar?
- 1922 — Wallace
Stevens's "The
Emperor of Ice Cream" (1922).
- Call the roller of big cigars, / The muscular one, and bid him whip / In kitchen cups concupiscent curds.
Related terms
Translations
Extensive Definition
Although the idea of concupiscence is Latin in origin, it
has been co-opted and our understanding of it has been developed by
Christianity.
Based on conflicting ideas of original
sin, Catholics and
Protestants
have ideas of concupiscence that also contradict one another. For
Catholics the term has two meanings. In its widest sense,
concupiscence is any yearning of the soul for good; in its strict
and specific sense, it means a desire of the lower appetite
contrary to reason. For Protestants, concupiscence refers to what
they understand as the orientation, inclination or innate tendency
of human
beings to do evil.
"Concupiscence" is derived from the Latin word
concupiscentia meaning "a desire for worldly things."
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.
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.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.
Catholic Teaching on Concupiscence
The Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC) teaches that Adam and Eve were constituted in an original "state of holiness and justice" (CCC 375, 376 398), free from concupiscence (CCC 337). By sinning, however, Adam lost this original "state," not only for himself but for all human beings (CCC 416). As a result of this original sin, according to Catholics, human nature has not been totally corrupted (as Luther and Calvin taught); rather, human nature has only been weakened and wounded, subject to ignorance, suffering, the domination of death, and the inclination to sin and evil (CCC 405, 418). This inclination toward sin and evil is called "concupiscence" (CCC 405, 418). Baptism, Catholics believe, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God. The inclination toward sin and evil persists, however, and he must continue to struggle against concupiscence(CCC 2520).Concupiscence and Sensuality
Thomas Aquinas described two divisions of "sensuality": the concupiscible (pursuit/avoidance instincts) and the irascible (competition/aggression/defense instincts). With the former are associated the emotions of joy and sadness, love and hate, desire and repugnance; with the latter, daring and fear, hope and despair, anger.References
- 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.
concupiscent in German: Konkupiszenz
concupiscent in Spanish: Concupiscencia
concupiscent in French: Concupiscence
concupiscent in Italian:
Concupiscenza