The Paradox of Sinful Desires and Habitual Patterns

The concept of sinful desires and habitual patterns is rooted in biblical teachings and has been explored by various Christian traditions. According to Charles Hodge, sin is understood as a state or condition that encompasses not only voluntary acts but also dispositions and habits that are contrary to God's holy nature ^[2].

The biblical anchor for this concept is found in passages such as Matthew 5:27-28, where Jesus teaches that lusting after someone is equivalent to committing adultery in one's heart. Augustine interprets this as indicating that sin can occur in the heart before it is acted upon, and that habitual sin can lead to a deeper entrenchment of sinful desires ^[4].

The development of sinful desires and habitual patterns is attributed to various factors, including the influence of external forces and the inherent weaknesses of human nature. Origen suggests that hostile powers can spread occasions and beginnings of sins, leading individuals to desire and eventually act upon sinful inclinations ^[1]. Aquinas, on the other hand, argues that inordinate self-love is the root cause of every sin, and that this self-love can manifest as concupiscence of the flesh, concupiscence of the eyes, or pride of life ^[6].

The Reformed tradition, as represented by Charles Hodge, emphasizes that sin is not just an act, but a state or condition that can be characterized by habitual patterns of behavior. Hodge argues that moral character is not solely determined by voluntary acts, but also by dispositions and habits that are inherent to an individual's nature ^[3]. This understanding is reflected in the Reformed confessions, which describe original sin as a corruption of human nature that affects not only acts, but also the underlying dispositions and habits ^[8].

In contrast, the Catholic tradition, as represented by Aquinas, places greater emphasis on the role of reason and will in the development of sinful desires and habitual patterns. According to Aquinas, sin can occur through malice, which involves a deliberate choice to act contrary to God's law. Habit can also play a role in sin, as repeated actions can shape an individual's inclinations and make it more difficult to resist sinful desires ^[5].

The paradox of sinful desires and habitual patterns lies in the complex interplay between human agency and the influence of external forces. While individuals are responsible for their sinful actions, they are also affected by factors beyond their control, such as original sin and the influence of hostile powers. This paradox is reflected in the varying emphases of different Christian traditions, which highlight the need for a nuanced understanding of the complex factors at play.

The implications of this paradox are significant, as they highlight the need for a comprehensive approach to addressing sinful desires and habitual patterns. This may involve a recognition of the role of original sin and the influence of external forces, as well as a commitment to cultivating virtues and habits that are contrary to sinful desires. As Calvin notes, the desire for riches and other earthly goods can be a source of sin, and individuals must be mindful of the dangers of covetousness and other sinful inclinations ^[7].

Sources

Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “ANF Vol 4: Tertullian IV, Minucius Felix, Commodian, Origen — CHAP. II.--ON' THE OPPOSING POWERS. (part 5): occasions and beginnings of sins, which these hostile powers spread far and wide, and, if possible, beyond all limits. Thus, when men at first for a little desire money, covetousness begins to grow as the passion increases, and finally the fall into avarice takes place. And after this, when blindness of mind has succeeded passion, and the hostile powers, by their suggestions, hurry on the mind, money is now no longer desired, but stolen, and acquired by force, or even by shedding human b”
CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, section 44: conformity to the nature of God, that it condemns evil dispositions or habits, as well as all voluntary sins, whether deliberate or impulsive. According to the Bible and the dictates of conscience there is a sinfulness as well as sins; there is such a thing as character as distinguished from transient acts by which it is revealed; that is, a sinful state, abiding, inherent, immanent forms of evil, which are truly and properly of the nature of sin. All sin, therefore, is not an agency, activity, or act; it may be and is also a condition or”
CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, section 28: sopping to inquire whether his disposition be innate, derived by inheritance from his ancestors, or whether it was acquired. On the contrary, if he manifests from his youth a disposition for the 112 acquisition of knowledge, he is an object of respect, no matter whence that disposition was derived. The same is true with regard to amiable or unamiable dispositions. It cannot be denied that there is a great difference in men in this respect. Some are morose, irritable, and unsocial in their dispositions, others are directly the reverse. The”
Schaff ANF/NPNF (Patristic) “NPNF1 Vol 6: Augustine — Homilies on the Gospels — CHAP. XII.--33. "Ye have heard that it was said to them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: but I say unto you, that whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her, hath committed adultery wi (part 2): guilty of this unwillingly. But yet, previous to habit, either there is no pleasure, or it is so slight that there is hardly any; and to yield to it is a great sin, as such pleasure is unlawful. Now, when any one does yield, he commits sin in the heart. If, however, he also proceeds to action, the desire seems to be satis- 16 fied and e”
theology (Catholic (Scholastic)) “Aquinas, Summa Theologica, First Part of the Second Part (Prima Secundae), Of That Cause of Sin Which Is Malice, Art. 3: Article: Whether one who sins through certain malice, sins through habit? I answer that, The will is related differently to good and to evil. Because from the very nature of the power, it is inclined to the rational good, as its proper object; wherefore every sin is said to be contrary to nature. Hence, if a will be inclined, by its choice, to some evil, this must be occasioned by something else. Sometimes, in fact, this is occasioned through some defect in the reason, as wh”
theology (Catholic (Scholastic)) “Aquinas, Summa Theologica, First Part of the Second Part (Prima Secundae), Of the Cause of Sin, on the Part of the Sensitive Appetite, Art. 5: Article: Whether concupiscence of the flesh, concupiscence of the eyes, and pride of life are fittingly described as causes of sin? I answer that, As stated above (Article [4]), inordinate self-love is the cause of every sin. Now self-love includes inordinate desire of good: for a man desires good for the one he loves. Hence it is evident that inordinate desire of good is the cause of every sin. Now good is, in two ways, the object of the sensitive appe”
CCEL (Reformed) “Calvin, Commentary on 1-2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, section 27.3: superfluous. Not that to use them more largely ought to be condemned on its own account, but lusting after them is always sinful. 9 They who wish to be rich After having exhorted him to be content, and to despise riches, he now explains how dangerous is the desire of having them, and especially in the ministers of the Church, of whom he expressly speaks in this passage. Now the cause of the evils, which the Apostle here enumerates, is not riches, but an eager desire of them, even though the person should be poor. And here Paul s”
CCEL (Reformed (Old Princeton)) “Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, Vol. 2, section 50: § 13. Original Sin. The effects of Adam’s sin upon his posterity are declared in our standards to be, (1.) The guilt of his first sin. (2.) The loss of original righteousness. (3.) The corruption of our whole nature, which ( i.e. , which corruption), is commonly called original sin. Commonly, but not always. Not unfrequently by original sin is meant all the subjective evil consequences of the apostasy of our first parent, and it therefore includes all three of the particulars just mentioned. The National Synod of France, therefore, condem”

Ask Your Own Question