Original Sin and Concupiscence

  • Thread starter Thread starter Charlemagne_III
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Charlemagne_III

Guest
The Catechism states here:

*405 Although it is proper to each individual, original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called “concupiscence”. Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle. *

I am perplexed by the language here. If concupiscence did not exist until after the Fall, why did it not exist before the Fall? Before the Fall, Adam and Eve apparently were inclined to sin and the Serpent knew this. Therefore, at the moment of his creation, was man not inclined to evil as well as to good? :confused:
 
To be inclined means to lean in a particular direction. It is not possible to be inclined in opposite directions at the same time. It is possible, however, to be free to go in one direction or another, as were Adam and Eve before and after their fall. Why would they, having clear intellects and upright wills, fall away from God? I don’t know. Same could be asked of the angels who fell.

Concupiscence (disordered desires), by the way, was only one of the effects of the fall. Man’s will was also weakened, and his intellect darkened. Not to mention the loss of the preternatural gifts, and consequently death and disease. And of course the loss of sanctifying grace, which thankfully we can get back.
 
St. Paul writes about the “flesh vs. the spirit” and the Fathers often discuss the “passions.”

What they mean is that, after the Fall, the spiritual part of man was disconnected from the animal part of man, with the animal part being impulses such as hunger, thirst, sex drive, safety, etc, and the spiritual part being knowledge (intellect) and moral choice (will).

Before the Fall, the animal part of man was completely under control of the spiritual part of man, and so the passion or the “flesh” wouldn’t try to internally “tempt” the will to go against reason and the Divine commands. As a result, when Adam and Eve sinned, they didn’t do so out of weakness, like say a drug addict or alcoholic, but freely choose evil.

After the Fall, the Grace that kept the animal aspect of man integrated with the spiritual aspect was gone, and so the animal aspect now fights against the spiritual aspect. What wetched creatures we are!

The key distinction, to answer your question, is the distinction between the will and the passions. The will is that which makes moral choices, and the passions are impulses and temptations that try to tempt the will to blindly follow wherever they blow, instead of following reason and the Divine law. As such, when the Catechism uses the phrase “inclined to sin” it means that the will of fallen man is weaken, and that the passions now try to drag the will toward sin. Adam and Eve didn’t originally experience this, as the passions were completely subordinate to their wills, so they were truly free to choose good or evil, which makes their sin incredibly serious.

The fact that the New Eve also didn’t experience the conflict between the flesh and spirit means she was completely free to choice God too, and that fact that she did is incredibly amazing!

Christi pax,

Lucretius

St. Monica, pray for us!
 
Charlemagne_III said:
The Catechism states here:

*405 Although it is proper to each individual, original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called “concupiscence”. Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle. *

I am perplexed by the language here. If concupiscence did not exist until after the Fall, why did it not exist before the Fall? Before the Fall, Adam and Eve apparently were inclined to sin and the Serpent knew this. Therefore, at the moment of his creation, was man not inclined to evil as well as to good? :confused:
Click to expand...
The gift of “integrity” (which is the opposite of concupiscence) effected a harmonious relation between flesh and spirit by completely subordinating man’s lower passions to his reason. However the first sin was the willful desire to have something that belongs to God alone.
 
Lucretius said:
After the Fall, the Grace that kept the animal aspect of man integrated with the spiritual aspect was gone, and so the animal aspect now fights against the spiritual aspect. What wetched creatures we are!

St. Monica, pray for us!
Click to expand...
This is difficult for me to grasp. Wasn’t the grace that kept the animal aspect integrated with the spiritual aspect gone before the fall, or why would the fall have happened? :confused:
 
Vico said:
The gift of “integrity” (which is the opposite of concupiscence) effected a harmonious relation between flesh and spirit by completely subordinating man’s lower passions to his reason. However the first sin was the willful desire to have something that belongs to God alone.
Click to expand...
Apparently the “harmonious” relation between flesh and spirit was not all that harmonious?
 
Charlemagne_III said:
This is difficult for me to grasp. Wasn’t the grace that kept the animal aspect integrated with the spiritual aspect gone before the fall, or why would the fall have happened? :confused:
Click to expand...
The Fall was not caused by the flesh attempting to override the spirit, but rather by the spirit making a pure choice, similar to Satan and his Angels’ choice. The Grace before the Fall (often called “Original Grace,” “Original Innocence,” or “Original Justice”) did not deny the spirit free choice: it just, in part, kept the flesh ordered to the spirit.

If you look at the big picture, just making a part spirit, part animal creature just looks like a mess, because two very different natures would be at war for control of the creature, and the poor thing would be constantly at war within itself. So God came up with this “original Grace” idea to keep the animalistic part under control by the spiritual part (which is more noble: the Image of God within us).

You seem to think that original Grace makes us less free in our choices, but it actually makes us more free, because our wills can truly choose between God and evil without any distractions.

Not all sins are from weakness to the flesh: Satan’s sin is of a pure spiritual nature: Pride. In other words, sin is first and foremost spirtual, and sin can only arise from spirit. Contra the Dualists, matter in itself can never go wrong; it is spirit that can go wrong.

Christi pax,

Lucretius
 
Charlemagne_III said:
The Catechism states here:

*405 Although it is proper to each individual, original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called “concupiscence”. Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle. *

I am perplexed by the language here. If concupiscence did not exist until after the Fall, why did it not exist before the Fall? Before the Fall, Adam and Eve apparently were inclined to sin and the Serpent knew this. Therefore, at the moment of his creation, was man not inclined to evil as well as to good? :confused:
Click to expand...
Before the Fall man’s reason, with his spirit, was in control of “the flesh”, of the “lower” appetites. Harmony existed within; man was not yet* divided within himself *as the catechism teaches he is now. As long as he remained subject to and in communion with God, his moral integrity remained intact. The most basic of all sins, which opened the door to any and all possibilities for mans behavior-no limitations whatsoever-was to disobey God. It wasn’t yet concupiscence that drove this original foolishness. Rather it was a not-yet-perfected-will, informed by a yet to be perfected wisdom, God having made His universe in a “state of journeying to perfection.” Man apparently needed time spent as a Prodigal.
 
Concupiscence did not exist before the fall, but is a consequence of the fall. Concupiscence is not a sin, but it is our weakened will that remains with us after baptism because we were not created in a state of Grace like Adam, Eve, Mary and Jesus were.

Adam and Eve did not have a desire to sin. This is why Satan appeared in a physical form to them, because an intellectual argument - Adam and Eve would not have fallen. They fell out of terror. They fell because they were afraid to suffer and lose their life. A person may not be inclined to sin, but when faced with violence they may not have the courage to be a martyr for the faith. You see this in Jesus response on the road to Emmaus after his resurrection. He tells the disciples didn’t you understand that the Son of Man had to suffer. We are always trying to avoid it even today we try to avoid it, and often that means we do not fully put our trust and faith in God.

Original sin means that we are not conceived with God’s life in us from the start. Original sin is not an actual sin, but state declaring that we do not have within ourselves the ability to live as part of God’s family in Heaven. Just like your body is not able to live underwater your soul cannot live in Heaven until your are born from above through baptism. At which time your soul is able to operate, with God’s life imparted to you, in Heaven. This though does not remove concupiscence as Jesus death on the cross was to provide Mercy for the children of Adam and Eve as their parents first sin brought God’s justice down upon us.

The death of Jesus provided redemption for all mankind. That mercy is for everyone. Salvation/Justification is separate and when we are made children of God through faith and baptism then we are saved providing we do not choose to leave God’s family.
 
Charlemagne_III said:
The Catechism states here:

*405 Although it is proper to each individual, original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam’s descendants. It is a deprivation of original holiness and justice, but human nature has not been totally corrupted: it is wounded in the natural powers proper to it, subject to ignorance, suffering and the dominion of death, and inclined to sin - an inclination to evil that is called “concupiscence”. Baptism, by imparting the life of Christ’s grace, erases original sin and turns a man back towards God, but the consequences for nature, weakened and inclined to evil, persist in man and summon him to spiritual battle. *

I am perplexed by the language here. If concupiscence did not exist until after the Fall, why did it not exist before the Fall? Before the Fall, Adam and Eve apparently were inclined to sin and the Serpent knew this. Therefore, at the moment of his creation, was man not inclined to evil as well as to good? :confused:
Click to expand...
Some great answers. Loved ichabode.

Just would like to add: Yes. The catechism is not easy to understand, a pet peeve of mine, having had to work with it.

At the moment of his creation man was inclined toward good. He WALKED WITH GOD in the garden. He knew not evil God told him: Do not eat of the tree in the center of the garden, the tree of the KNOWLEDGE of good and evil.

This means that he knew only good to begin with.

But then the serpent, satan, convinced him that God was trying to keep something from him. So he then chose to listen to satan and ate of the tree of the knowledge and evil entered into man and nature too.

At this point man has the choice between good and evil. Before he only had the choice of obeying or not obeying God and he chose not to obey, but it was not concupisence but his desire to be like God.

I like what one poster said about satan having to SPEAK with Eve. But he speaks to us all, doesn’t he?

It could be a bit confusing I guess. I mean, where did evil first come from anyway, which is what you’re really asking. Difficult topic to get into and which no one can really answer.

God bless
 
Scott Hahn also discusses the Fall and why it happened in his book, First Comes Love, IIRC. I personally have only read parts of the book, but I’ve read other works by Dr. Hahn, and they are fantastic!

Christi pax,

Lucretius

St. Augustine, pray for us!
 
ichabode said:
Concupiscence did not exist before the fall, but is a consequence of the fall. Concupiscence is not a sin, but it is our weakened will that remains with us after baptism because we were not created in a state of Grace like Adam, Eve, Mary and Jesus were.

Adam and Eve did not have a desire to sin. This is why Satan appeared in a physical form to them, because an intellectual argument - Adam and Eve would not have fallen. They fell out of terror. They fell because they were afraid to suffer and lose their life. A person may not be inclined to sin, but when faced with violence they may not have the courage to be a martyr for the faith. You see this in Jesus response on the road to Emmaus after his resurrection. He tells the disciples didn’t you understand that the Son of Man had to suffer. We are always trying to avoid it even today we try to avoid it, and often that means we do not fully put our trust and faith in God.

Original sin means that we are not conceived with God’s life in us from the start. Original sin is not an actual sin, but state declaring that we do not have within ourselves the ability to live as part of God’s family in Heaven. Just like your body is not able to live underwater your soul cannot live in Heaven until your are born from above through baptism. At which time your soul is able to operate, with God’s life imparted to you, in Heaven. This though does not remove concupiscence as Jesus death on the cross was to provide Mercy for the children of Adam and Eve as their parents first sin brought God’s justice down upon us.

The death of Jesus provided redemption for all mankind. That mercy is for everyone. Salvation/Justification is separate and when we are made children of God through faith and baptism then we are saved providing we do not choose to leave God’s family.
Click to expand...
They were told not to eat of the tree of good and evil as they would die. How do you read it as they didn’t want to suffer and die? They only suffer and die after they disobey.
 
Vico said:
The gift of “integrity” (which is the opposite of concupiscence) effected a harmonious relation between flesh and spirit by completely subordinating man’s lower passions to his reason. However the first sin was the willful desire to have something that belongs to God alone.
Click to expand...
There was no “complete” subordination of man’s lower passions to his reason, and we know this because Adam and Eve rebelled against God.
 
fhansen said:
But was the rebellion caused by the passions of the lower appetite?
Click to expand...
What would you call the “lower appetite”? Wanting a forbidden apple? :confused:

If the “forbidden fruit” becomes merely a symbol for the higher appetite of wanting to be as God, I find it difficult to distinguish between the lower and the higher appetites.

I really think man’s destiny was sealed from the moment of his creation.

God knew man would sin, since God is outside time and omniscient.

Concupiscence seems to be a built-in suicidal sin detector right from the start.

I don’t get the distinction between innocence before the Fall and concupiscence after the Fall. Wasn’t there an inclination to sin before the Fall? :confused:

Isn’t that the definition of concupiscence … an inclination to sin?
 
**I don’t get the distinction between innocence before the Fall and concupiscence after the Fall. Wasn’t there an inclination to sin before the Fall?
**

Charlemagne of course has a great point which begs a question to which I alluded to earlier but no one caught on to.

Here’s my point again:

It could be a bit confusing I guess. I mean, where did evil first come from anyway, which is what you’re really asking. Difficult topic to get into and which no one can really answer.

Maybe we could munch on that for a while.

I think we pretty much all know the story of Adam and Eve backward and forward.

So - Satan tempted Eve. Satan fell from grace with God and was banished from heaven and found a new home down in the depths. So he represents the evil of disobeying God or wanting to be like God - the big sin of pride.

So - Satan is the evil. Eve is tempted with the evil. She accepts the evil and evil enters into the world and into nature.

But - where did the evil FIRST come from? Did it exist when satan fell?

Did God create evil?

I like that question better!

God bless
 
frangiuliano115 said:
**

So - Satan is the evil. Eve is tempted with the evil. She accepts the evil and evil enters into the world and into nature.

But - where did the evil FIRST come from? Did it exist when satan fell?

Did God create evil?

I like that question better!

God bless**

My question is not when evil first came to exist, but when concupiscence first came to exist.

I think concupiscence, if it is defined as the inclination to evil, first existed in both Satan and Adam and Eve when they were first created, or else they might not have sinned if that inclination did not already exist.

Somebody help me out here?
Click to expand...
 
Charlemagne_III said:
My question is not when evil first came to exist, but when concupiscence first came to exist.

I think concupiscence, if it is defined as the inclination to evil, first existed in both Satan and Adam and Eve when they were first created, or else they might not have sinned if that inclination did not already exist.

Somebody help me out here?
Click to expand...
It seems to me that the answer to the question “when concupiscence first came to exist?”, is contained in the CCC quote included the OP. Namely, concupiscence came to exist immediately following the commission of the original sin.
 
davidv said:
It seems to me that the answer to the question “when concupiscence first came to exist?”, is contained in the CCC quote included the OP. Namely, concupiscence came to exist immediately following the commission of the original sin.
Click to expand...
This is what I find difficult to understand.

The Catechism says an inclination to evil that is called “concupiscence”.

How does this inclination to evil differ from the inclination to evil that existed before the Fall? Is it merely a “greater” inclination to evil? But what inclination to evil could be greater than the inclination to commit the origi9nal sin?

Am I being obtuse by not getting this?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top