Damage to the heart: mortal and venial

In the Church of England’s 1980 Baptism Service, two of the questions to parents and godparents are ‘do you repent of your sins’ and ‘do you renounce evil’.⁴⁸ I used to say the first question referred to all the things we do every day and know that we shouldn’t, and the second to the half dozen moments in our lives when we are faced with the real possibility of doing something major for our own satisfaction that we know to be utterly wrong. The first response – ‘I repent of my sins’ – is a promise to be the best we can be day by day; the second – ‘I renounce evil’ – is a pledge for the sake of the child and all humankind that when those moments of temptation come, we will make the right choice.

There is no clear boundary between sin and evil, but we know there is a contrast here. In the catholic tradition it is the difference between mortal and venial sin. These become essential concepts in understanding sin not as an offence against an arbitrary and wrathful God, but as damage that we inflict upon ourselves. Committing venial sin offends and wounds the compassion of the heart; committing mortal sin destroys it.⁴⁹

In practical terms, for sin to be defined as mortal, three conditions apply. It must be a grave matter, and it must executed with both full knowledge and complete consent. The definition of grave matter is not precise, but the ten commandments are suggested as a starting point: a top ten list of serious issues. Full knowledge means the action is known to be unambiguously wrong, and complete consent means the action is deliberately chosen, after full consideration and without duress. If any of these three conditions is not met, the matter is venial rather than mortal: the compassion of the heart is offended and wounded, but not destroyed.⁵⁰

The damage done to the heart begins to heal – and the relationship with God is restored – the very moment there is perfect contrition. This is defined as ‘a sorrow of the soul and detestation for the sin committed, together with the resolution not to sin again’, all arising from ‘a love by which God is loved above all else’.⁵¹ Inevitably such perfect contrition will be accompanied by a desire to ‘do what is possible in order to repair the harm (return stolen goods, restore the reputation of someone slandered, pay compensation for injuries)’, and by a desire to cooperate with God in the healing of the sinner’s own wounded heart by such beneficial spiritual practices as ‘prayer, an offering, works of mercy, service of neighbour, voluntary self-denial, sacrifices, and above all the patient acceptance of the cross we must bear’. These natural responses of the healing heart are called, respectively, satisfaction and penance.⁵² Neither is a condition of forgiveness, for there is no unforgiveness, only damage done to another and to the self: the healing heart longs to do what it can to restore that damage in both the self and the other, perfectly reflecting and cooperating with God’s own desire for the same. In such cases of perfect contrition, the church does not presume to interfere: sacramental confession is available, but not required.⁵³

The church recognises that there is also imperfect contrition. There is still ‘a sorrow of the soul and detestation for the sin committed, together with the resolution not to sin again’, but it arises less from ‘a love by which God is loved above all else’ and more from ‘the consideration of sin’s ugliness or the fear of eternal damnation and other penalties threatening the sinner’.⁵⁴ In cases of such imperfect contrition, the church invites the penitent to sacramental confession. This is an opportunity to receive the assurance of God’s forgiveness, despite the imperfect contrition, and to discuss with the minister of the sacrament any appropriate satisfaction and penance, both aimed ultimately at restoring that ‘love of God before all else’.⁵⁵

In the particular case of mortal sin, even with perfect contrition, the church insists that the offender comes to sacramental confession – the sacrament of reconciliation – if there is to be a restoration of the relationship between the offender and the church.⁵⁶ This is as much about reconciliation with the church as with God, the offender having brought the institution into disrepute. Where there is contrition, even imperfect contrition, leading to some attempt at satisfaction and penance, the church assures God’s forgiveness, and by this sacrament also declares reconciliation with the church community.

At no point is the sacrament of reconciliation about presuming to grant or withhold God’s forgiveness. It is about the imperfectly contrite, and those guilty even of mortal sin, discussing their contrition, satisfaction, penance, and love for God with a minister of the church, and there receiving both reconciliation with the church and the assurance of God’s forgiveness. It is a sacramental celebration of grace, forgiveness, and the healing of the wounded heart. Jesus’ words to Peter about binding and loosing on earth having the same effect in heaven⁵⁷ are a warning about the use and abuse of these ordinary very human powers, not a granting of any new ones.

48 Alternative Service Book 1980 (ASB) page 245

49 Catechism items 1854 and 1855. There is also an intriguing hint in scripture, in the closing verses of the first letter of Saint John (1 John 5:16-17): ‘If you see a sin committed that is not mortal, you should ask, and God will give life for those whose sin is not mortal. There is sin which is mortal: I do not say that you should pray for that. All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin which is not mortal.’

57 Matthew 16:19 and Matthew 18:18 both include the saying, ‘Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.’ John 20:23 is addressed to all the disciples, and has the more direct text, ‘If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained,’ – although the meaning is the same.