▾
Augustine of Hippo, On Marriage And Concupiscence
⎗←→⎘
▾
on augustin’s forwarding to him what he calls his first book “on marriage and concupiscence.”
On Marriage and Concupiscence,
Chapter 1.—Concerning the Argument of This Treatise.
Chapter 2. [II.]—Why This Treatise Was Addressed to Valerius.
Chapter 3 [III.]—Conjugal Chastity the Gift of God.
Chapter 8 [VII.]—The Evil of Lust Does Not Take Away the Good of Marriage.
Chapter 15.—The Teaching of the Apostle on This Subject.
Chapter 18 [XVI.]—Continence Better Than Marriage But Marriage Better Than Fornication.
Chapter 19 [XVII.]—Blessing of Matrimony.
Chapter 20 [XVIII]—Why Children of Wrath are Born of Holy Matrimony.
Chapter 24.—Lust and Shame Come from Sin The Law of Sin The Shamelessness of the Cynics.
Chapter 30 [XXVII.]—The Evil Desires of Concupiscence We Ought to Wish that They May Not Be.
Chapter 31 [XXVIII.]—Who is the Man that Can Say, “It is No More I that Do It”?
Chapter 32.—When Good Will Be Perfectly Done.
Chapter 33 [XXX.]—True Freedom Comes with Willing Delight in God’s Law.
Chapter 34.—How Concupiscence Made a Captive of the Apostle What the Law of Sin Was to the Apostle.
Chapter 35 [XXXI.]—The Flesh, Carnal Affection.
Chapter 36.—Even Now While We Still Have Concupiscence We May Be Safe in Christ.
Chapter 1 [I.]—Introductory Statement.
Chapter 3.—The Same Continued.
Chapter 4.—The Same Continued.
Chapter 5.—The Same Continued.
Chapter 6.—The Same Continued.
Chapter 8.—Augustin Refutes the Passage Adduced Above.
Chapter 10 [IV.]—In What Manner the Adversary’s Cavils Must Be Refuted.
Chapter 11.—The Devil the Author, Not of Nature, But Only of Sin.
Chapter 12.—Eve’s Name Means Life, and is a Great Sacrament of the Church.
Chapter 13.—The Pelagian Argument to Show that the Devil Has No Rights in the Fruits of Marriage.
Chapter 14 [V.]—Concupiscence Alone, in Marriage, is Not of God.
Chapter 16 [VI.]—It is Not of Us, But Our Sins, that the Devil is the Author.
Chapter 18.—The Same Continued.
Chapter 19 [VIII.]—The Pelagians Misunderstand “Seed” In Scripture.
Chapter 20.—Original Sin is Derived from the Faulty Condition of Human Seed.
Chapter 21 [IX.]—It is the Good God That Gives Fruitfulness, and the Devil That Corrupts the Fruit.
Chapter 22.—Shall We Be Ashamed of What We Do, or of What God Does?
Chapter 24 [XI.]—What Covenant of God the New-Born Babe Breaks. What Was the Value of Circumcision.
Chapter 25 [XII.]—Augustin Not the Deviser of Original Sin.
Chapter 26 [XIII.]—The Child in No Sense Formed by Concupiscence.
Chapter 28 [XIV.]—Augustin’s Answer to This Argument. Its Dealing with Scripture.
Chapter 29.—The Same Continued. Augustin Also Asserts that God Forms Man at Birth.
Chapter 30 [XV.]—The Case of Abimelech and His House Examined.
Chapter 31 [XVI.]—Why God Proceeds to Create Human Beings, Who He Knows Will Be Born in Sin.
Chapter 32 [XVII.]—God Not the Author of the Evil in Those Whom He Creates.
Chapter 33 [XVIII.]—Though God Makes Us, We Perish Unless He Re-makes Us in Christ.
Chapter 36 [XXI.]—God Made Nature Good: the Saviour Restores It When Corrupted.
Chapter 39 [XXIV.]—Man Born of Whatever Parentage is Sinful and Capable of Redemption.
Chapter 40 [XXV.]—Augustin Declines the Dilemma Offered Him.
Chapter 43.—The Good Tree in the Gospel that Cannot Bring Forth Evil Fruit, Does Not Mean Marriage.
Chapter 45.—Answer to This Argument: The Apostle Says We All Sinned in One.
Chapter 47.—The Scriptures Repeatedly Teach Us that All Sin in One.
Chapter 48.—Original Sin Arose from Adam’s Depraved Will. Whence the Corrupt Will Sprang.
Chapter 49 [XXIX.]—In Infants Nature is of God, and the Corruption of Nature of the Devil.
Chapter 52 [XXX.]—Sin Was the Origin of All Shameful Concupiscence.
Chapter 53 [XXXI.]—Concupiscence Need Not Have Been Necessary for Fruitfulness.
Chapter 54 [XXXII.]—How Marriage is Now Different Since the Existence of Sin.
Chapter 55 [XXXIII.]—Lust is a Disease The Word “Passion” In the Ecclesiastical Sense.
Chapter 57 [XXXIV.]—The Great Sin of the First Man.
Chapter 60.—Let Not the Pelagians Indulge Themselves in a Cruel Defence of Infants.
Chapter 35 [XXXI.]—The Flesh, Carnal Affection.
But we have in the apostle’s own language, a little before, a sufficiently clear proof that he might have meant his flesh when he said, “Bringing me into captivity.” For after declaring, “I know that in me dwelleth no good thing,” he at once added an explanatory sentence to this effect, “That is,in my flesh.”122 Rom. vii. 18. It is then the flesh, in which there dwells nothing good, that is brought into captivity to the law of sin. Now he designates that as the flesh wherein lies a certain morbid carnal affection, not the mere conformation of our bodily fabric whose members are not to be used as weapons for sin—that is, for that very concupiscence which holds this flesh of ours captive. So far, indeed, as concerns this actual bodily substance and nature of ours, it is already God’s temple in all faithful men, whether living in marriage or in continence. If, however, absolutely nothing of our flesh were in captivity, not even to the devil, because there has accrued to it the remission of sin, that sin be not imputed to it (and this is properly designated the law of sin); yet if under this law of sin, that is, under its own concupiscence, our flesh were not to some degree held captive, how could that be true which the apostle states, when he speaks of our “waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body”?123 Rom. viii. 23. In so far, then, as there is now this waiting for the redemption of our body, there is also in some degree still existing something in us which is a captive to the law of sin. Accordingly he exclaims, “O wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death? The grace of God, through Jesus Christ our Lord.”124 Rom. vii. 24. What are we to understand by such language, but that our body, which is undergoing corruption, weighs heavily on our soul? When, therefore, this very body of ours shall be restored to us in an incorrupt state, there shall be a full liberation from the body of this death; but there will be no such deliverance for them who shall rise again to condemnation. To the body of this death then is understood to be owing the circumstance that there is in our members another law which wars against the law of the mind, so long as the flesh lusts against the spirit—without, however, subjugating the mind, inasmuch as on its side, too, the spirit has a concupiscence contrary to the flesh.125 Gal. v. 17. Thus, although the actual law of sin partly holds the flesh in captivity (whence comes its resistance to the law of the mind), still it has not an absolute empire in our body, notwithstanding its mortal state, since it refuses obedience to its desires.126 Rom. vi. 12. For in the case of hostile armies between whom there is an earnest conflict, even the side which is inferior in the fight usually holds a something which it has captured; and although in some such way there is somewhat in our flesh which is kept under the law of sin, yet it has before it the hope of redemption: and then there will remain not a particle of this corrupt concupiscence; but our flesh, healed of that diseased plague, and wholly clad in immortality, shall live for evermore in eternal blessedness.
CAPUT XXXI.
35. Caro, carnis affectus. Quanquam 0433 paulo superius, et ipse Apostolus quomodo recte potuerit de carne sua dicere, captivantem me, satis evidenter aperuit. Cum enim dixisset, Scio enim quia non habitat in me; idipsum exponens adjunxit, et ait, hoc est in carne mea, bonum. Haec ergo captivatur sub lege peccati, in qua non habitat bonum, hoc est, caro. Carnem autem nunc appellavit, ubi est morbidus quidam carnis affectus; non ipsam corporis conformationem, cujus membra non adhibenda sunt arma peccato, id est, eidem ipsi concupiscentiae, quae hoc carnale nostrum captivum tenet. Nam quantum attinet ad ipsam corporalem substantiam atque naturam, in viris fidelibus, sive conjugatis, sive continentibus, jam templum Dei est. Attamen si omnino nihil carnis nostrae captivum teneretur, non quidem sub diabolo, quia et ibi facta est peccati remissio, ut peccatum non imputetur, quod proprie lex peccati vocatur; tamen sub ipsa lege peccati, hoc est, sub concupiscentia sua, nisi aliquantum teneretur caro nostra captiva, quomodo esset verum quod ait idem apostolus, Adoptionem exspectantes, redemptionem corporis nostri (Rom. VIII, 23)? In tantum igitur adhuc exspectatur redemptio corporis nostri, in quantum adhuc ex aliqua parte captivum est sub lege peccati. Unde et hic exclamans ait: Infelix ego homo, quis me liberabit de corpore mortis hujus? Gratia Dei per Jesum Christum Dominum nostrum. Ubi quid intellecturi sumus, nisi quia corpus quod corrumpitur, aggravat animam (Sap. IX, 15)? Cum ergo idipsum corpus jam incorruptibile recipietur, plena erit liberatio a corpore mortis hujus: a quo non liberantur, qui sunt ad poenam resurrecturi. Ad corpus ergo mortis hujus intelligitur pertinere, ut alia lex in membris repugnet quidem legi mentis, dum caro concupiscit adversus spiritum; etsi mentem non subjuget, quia et spiritus concupiscit adversus carnem (Galat. V, 17): atque ita quamvis lex ipsa peccati captivum teneat aliquid carnis, unde resistat legi mentis; non tamen regnat in nostro licet mortali corpore, si non obeditur desideriis ejus. Solent enim et hostes adversus quos dimicatur, et inferiores esse in certamine, et victi aliquid tenere captivum: quod in nostra carne quamvis sub peccati lege teneatur, tamen in spe redemptionis est; quia ipsa vitiosa concupiscentia nulla omnino remanebit, caro autem nostra ab ea peste morboque sanata, et tota immortalitate vestita, in aeterna beatitudine permanebit.