Hostname: page-component-5db58dd55d-lqwgf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-31T12:26:45.404Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

‘Acedia’ 700–1200*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 July 2016

Siegfried Wenzel*
Affiliation:
University 01 North Carolina
Get access

Extract

Among the seven deadly sins, none is more interesting to study for its historical development and the complexity of its meaning than the sin of acedia. For while its companions — with the possible exception of avarice — remained fairly static through the centuries of medieval thought, and indeed have remained so to the present, acedia presented a variety of faces and changed in its very nature, from the moment when it entered Christian teaching in the West to the fifteenth century. In Christian thinking, pride has always been pride; its psychological roots may have been explained in agreement with different philosophical and psychological systems, and its manifestations may vary according to changing attitudes and experiences, but its nature has remained essentially unchanged. The same is true of envy, wrath, lust, and the others. But not so with acedia. A reflection of the complexity which this concept acquired during its medieval lifetime can still be seen in the totally different connotations which its names have for the cognoscenti of today. The ancient term acedia fascinates because it suggests such phenomena as spiritual dryness, ennui or WeItschmerz, while its vernacular equivalent sloth, as everyone readily agrees, stands for something so common and ordinary that it hardly deserves a second thought.

Information

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Fordham University Press 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable