Inner separation of the person from the nuptial meaning of the body. Not the sexual drive itself (which is ontologically good), but a disorder in the disposition of the person: the other is reduced to an object of desire. Hildebrand identifies concupiscence as one of the two fundamental roots of moral evil (alongside superbia, pride). Thomas Aquinas treats it in Summa Theologiae I-II, q. 77 as a cause of sin.
Concupiscence is essentially a failure against the personalist norm: where the other becomes an object of desire, he is instrumentalized. His dignity as a person is disregarded. This does not happen only in outward action, but already in the inner disposition. The lustful gaze of which Scripture speaks is already a form of concupiscence. It reduces the person to her body and the body to an object of lust.
Concupiscence thus stands in diametrical opposition to self-gift, which affirms the other as a person and gives itself to him for his own sake (cf. Bexten 2017, pp. 210–218).
Decisive is the personal-ontological distinction: the sexual drive as such is ontologically good. It belongs to the bodily nature of the person and is ordered toward the communio personarum. Concupiscence is not the drive itself, but its distortion through a disposition that fails to recognize the personal character of sexuality.
Chastity is the virtue that counteracts concupiscence. It integrates sensuality into the service of personal love and so makes bodily self-gift possible. Concupiscence and chastity are therefore ontologically disjoint. They exclude one another like instrumentalization and the affirmation of the person.
Ontological classification:
Ontological relations:
- violates: personalist norm
- reduces the person to: object of desire
- stands in opposition to: self-gift, chastity
- manifests itself in: lustful gaze
Chapter assignment: Chapter 4: Personhood (German), Chapter 5: Oblivion of the Person (German)
Chastity
The virtue of integrating sensuality and the emotional life into the service of personal love. Chastity is NOT the suppression of sexuality, but its incorporation into personal self-determination. It presupposes self-mastery and makes self-gift possible.
The personal-ontological understanding of chastity differs fundamentally from a purely negative conception that misunderstands chastity as mere abstinence or suppression of the drives. Within the Thomistic-personalist framework, chastity is a positive virtue. It enables the person to order her sensuality and her emotional life such that they can enter into the service of personal love. The body is not regarded as an enemy of morality, but as a field of expression of the person that can unfold its personal meaning through chastity (cf. Bexten 2017, pp. 210–218).
Chastity stands in ontological disjunction to concupiscence. Where concupiscence reduces the other to an object of desire, chastity makes it possible to see the other as a person and to encounter him as a person in the bodily encounter. The chaste person does not master her body against her nature, but realizes her nature in its full personal depth.
Freedom is here the decisive precondition: only one who masters himself (self-mastery) can give himself (self-gift). Chastity is thus the virtue that protects the bodily dimension of personal love and brings it to unfolding.
As a virtue, chastity is a disposition become habitual, acquired and consolidated through repeated free acts. It is not a one-time resolve, but a constant formation of character that permeates the whole person — body, soul, and spirit — and orders it toward personal love.
Ontological classification:
- Superordinate concept: virtue
- disjoint with: concupiscence
Ontological relations:
- enables: self-gift, bodily self-gift
- presupposes: self-mastery, free will
- stands in opposition to: concupiscence
- serves: personal love
Chapter assignment: Chapter 4: Personhood (German)
Sources: Generated by querying the Personhood ontology.
Further sources:
- Dietrich von Hildebrand: Sittlichkeit und ethische Werterkenntnis (1922). Halle: Niemeyer. (concupiscence as a fundamental root of moral evil) (German)
- Thomas Aquinas: Summa Theologiae I-II, q. 77. Transl. Fathers of the English Dominican Province. New York: Benziger Bros., 1947. (concupiscence as a cause of sin)
- Karol Wojtyła: Love and Responsibility, transl. H. T. Willetts. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1981 (orig. 1960). (the nuptial meaning of the body and personal love)
See also: body, person, instrumentalization, chastity, self-gift, lustful gaze, personalist norm, dignity, Dietrich von Hildebrand, Thomas Aquinas
See also: virtue, man, woman, self-gift, concupiscence, personal love, body, freedom, free will, person, bodily self-gift, Karol Wojtyła, self-mastery, integration of the person, nuptial meaning of the body