Father John A. Hardon, S.J.

Archives

Sin

Conversion from Sin

by Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J.

Our present lecture is on conversion from sin necessary for salvation. This, as you
know, is our reflection on the Scriptures and, concretely, on what the Sacred
Scriptures tell us about conversion. First, by way of introduction, Christianity is
unintelligible without conversion from sin. Had there been no sin there would have
been no Christ and no Christianity. And the opposition over the centuries including, in
our day, opposition to the Church is opposition to the Church’s teaching on sin.
People want to do their own will in thousands of different ways. And the Church tells
us you may be doing your own will all right but that’s a sin because what you’re
doing is not according to the will of God. The very name Jesus means savior and
savior from sin. However, Christ will save no one who does not repent. In other
words, there is no reconciliation with God unless there is a prior repentance on my
part. As strange as the language may sound God cannot forgive, God cannot restore a
sinner to His friendship unless the sinner repents. In other words, there must be
conversion by the sinner before God before God will reconcile that sinner to Himself.
Of course this conversion, conversion requires grace from God, but repentance is a
condition for reconciliation.

We go on. Our purpose here in this present lecture is to look at the New Testament
stories of conversion and then draw some very serious lessons from what the Gospels
teach us about what? About what is sin, how we can be reconciled with God after
having sinned, and, what is most important, why God allows sin in order to do a
greater good than would have been possible had there been no sin. And, this is no
mere illustration because the favorite way that Christ taught was by making parables,
giving stories; either stories that were in real life or stories from real life to illustrate a
principle called parables. And the four we’ve chosen are The Prodigal son, Mary
Magdalen, Simon Peter, and The Repentant Thief on Calvary.

First, The Prodigal Son. Remember, there are at least two brothers, one of whom is
younger, and in Christ’s story or parable the younger one tells his father, “I want my
share of the inheritance.” He gets the money, squanders it, and then he is starving,
comes to his senses. His father, in the meantime, had been looking for his estranged
son. And when the boy finally comes back, remember, there is festivity, music,
singing. And the older brother asked, “What’s all the noise about?”

“Your brother has come home and your father is celebrating his return.”

“My brother. You mean, that bum (whatever word he used in Aramaic)! That lug!”
And then remember he won’t even go inside. He had the father come out and
remonstrates with his father, “You’ve never given me even a, well, well, even a small
celebration. And this son of yours (he wouldn’t even call him, my brother), you did
this for him?”

Remember the Father’s answer, “Your brother was lost. He has been found. He’s
come back. We should rejoice.”

Evidently the Prodigal was meant to teach us and to teach us a lot. Christ’s principal
teaching was through parables. And now in every language of the world prodigal has
a definite meaning: one who, well, went off, squanders money, talents and then comes
back. But notice even that coming back, the very word “conversion”, verti in Latin
means to turn. Convertere or converti means to turn and turn back completely. What
is Christ telling us? And in greater or less measure we can all identify with the
Prodigal Son. I know one person who can. That’s for sure. I was certain before I
entered the Society of Jesus unless I sacrificed marriage and a physical family and
lived a religious life taking orders from a superior; me taking orders from anybody,
but I did not think I would save my soul. Christ is telling us He came to save sinners.
And there is one thing that all of us must be thoroughly convinced of and we become
only as faithful in following Christ and with the grace only as holy as we honestly,
down deep in hearts, tell God, “Lord, I’m a sinner.” But, notice, the Prodigal Son had
first to come to his senses; and this, the bigger the sinner the more need there is for
some tragedy, some grave misfortune to awake the sinner from his or her stupor. In
other words, suppose he had taken the money, made, as we call it, a good investment,
and had enjoyed himself there would be no parable of the Prodigal Son. What we call
misfortune is not misfortune at all. It is God waking us up. We need it. Thank God for
what we call misfortunes: losing a job, losing a limb, losing one’s reputation. Then,
remember too, the young man, he would have to be the younger of the two, the
parable would not have been as strong if it had been the older. We’ve all gone through
this stage ourselves, and how humiliating it is just to reflect how stupid we have been.
But he wakes up and says, “I will go back and tell my father I’ve sinned before God
and before you. I’m not worthy to be called your son. Give me a job.” And so he takes
himself up back to where he came from. In the meantime, we are told the father, the
father had been on the lookout hoping he knew his boy and sees him at a distance. All
of this is what Christ wants to impress on us is the way God acts toward us. How
many of you have read Francis Thompson’s The Hound of Heaven? Tell you what,
I’m not sure how many pages it is, it’s not too much though, let me, for Christmas, let
me (Oh, Father something big, no I can’t do anything big) – let me make copies of
Francis Thompson’s The Hound of Heaven for Christmas, okay? And who is the
Hound of Heaven? Who is it? God, dragging us down. We need it. And then when the
father finally sees the son they embrace. In his joy he throws a big feast. And typical,
typical, his brother who didn’t cavort, remember when he told his father, “This son of
yours wasting his time and his money on loose women and here you throw a banquet
in his honor.”

And this, again, how many people over the years I’ve had to warn, watch it, watch it.
So maybe you have not sinned as deeply and as frequently as someone else, but don’t
you dare underestimate the mercy of God. It is so important to not follow the example
of the older brother, right? And no matter how bad a person or persons can be, and
they can be very bad, yet but we’ve got to tell ourselves, I don’t know how much
grace that person has; only God can judge the heart. External conduct is something
else. What they do if it’s bad we call it bad. Question: Once converted who was more
holy, the prodigal son who returned or the faithful brother who had never abandon his
father? God knows but it could well be the prodigal son. In other words, on the one
hand, not to boast even inside of our minds because somehow we have been spared
the tragedy of sinning as deeply as others whom we know. Never make what we call
insidious comparisons or invidious comparisons between yourself and someone else.
So there really are two lessons locked up in one: the lesson of the younger prodigal
son and the lesson of the envious older son.

Now Mary Magdalen. You notice, which evangelist carries all four stories of
conversion? Luke, and who was St. Luke? How was he related to Paul? He was his
disciple. And Paul had been a big sinner. That’s why, no doubt, he found Luke or
Luke found him. We may be sure that Paul’s mind was behind the Gospel of St. Luke
to bring out God’s mercy. So, women can be sinners too. Tradition identifies the
sinful woman at Christ’s feet with Mary Magdalen. She says nothing but weeps,
kisses Christ’s feet and pours ointment over them. And then Christ’s words, “Her
many sins are forgiven because she has loved much.” To all accounts that we’ve got
in commentators Mary Magdalen was a prostitute, had sinned and then she too came
to her senses. But notice, she finds out about Christ, goes to where He was staying,
and then, as providence would have it, weeps, Christ’s feet she washes, and the
evangelist tells us with her tears, and wipes them. Again, St. Ignatius encourages what
he calls the gift of tears to ask God for this gift. That does not mean if we don’t have
the gift of physically shedding tears we therefore, say, our repentance of our past sins
is either not sincere or as deep as that of another person who does weep. No.
However, it is a gift. And, remember, Christ Himself wept only on several occasions,
but the most important weeping of Christ was over what? Over Jerusalem. In other
words, if God became man so He might have human eyes and human tears He wants
to teach us that like Him we too should weep; He over our sins and we over our own.
However, whether we can physically weep or not, physically there is a deep sense in
which we should all weep interiorly. What is, what is the essence of weeping? The
essence of weeping is that the internal experience of sorrow causes, brings on, an
external manifestation. And is this ever important for all of us. In other words, even if
we don’t shed, as I say, physical tears our behavior, our conduct, our dealing with
other people should reflect the fact that we are sinners. Anyone who realizes, who
really realizes that he or she is a sinner will that person ever be scandalized at
someone else’s sins? No! Will that person be kind and forgiving and merciful? Yes. Is
a person who is really, really converted who realizes that he had so deeply offended
God, can that person ever be proud of anything? No! In other words, the realization of
my having sinned is to have an affect in my life so that my sorrow over the sins that I
have committed will manifest itself by behaving as a person who has repented and
tells God I am sorry. Meaning, how should I expect people to deal with me anything
but kindly or mercifully? In other words, I’ve deserved the worst possible treatment,
the worst treatment from others because I have so deeply sinned.

I also noticed Mary Magdalen not only repented but, we believe as found elsewhere in
the Gospels, to whom did Christ first appear after His resurrection? We may believe
that it was His mother, but there is nothing in Scripture. Scripture tells us it was Mary
Magdalen, specially beloved of Christ, privileged to bring the message of Christ’s
resurrection, remember, to His own Apostles.
We go on. Simon Peter, that combination Simon Peter, as you know, the first name
Simon is his family name. Peter was the name that Christ gave him. Peter three times
denied that he even knew Jesus and then Our Lord looks towards him. Peter sees
Christ and he repents. And then remember, as a follow-up after His resurrection,
Christ takes Peter aside on the shore of the lake and asks him, “Do you love Me
more?” More than who? “More than these others.” There is no way that Peter could
have known how much the others love Christ but he knew how much he should love
Christ. And this is, in many ways, the principal reason why God has allowed us to sin
so that once we come to our senses we will love Him more than we would have had
we not sinned. Only God knows, but we may say this on sound theological grounds,
had Simon not sinned by denying his master there would not have been a Peter. God
from all eternity anticipated that Simon would betray Jesus Christ, but in God’s
providential mind He foresaw both Peter’s infidelity; He foresaw also that Peter
would repent. Two men that should always be seen together and that’s Peter and
Judas. I’m not even sure whose was the greater sin, whether Peter’s or Judas’. Peter
repented. But then what happened? Christ then anticipated what Peter would do. He
was promised the Primacy, to be the visible head of the Church that Christ was
founding. But, and we have to say this, in God’s mysterious providence Simon had to
sin not that God might not have done it otherwise but He wants to teach us. That’s
why we’re choosing even that episode, an episode right at the very heart of the New
Testament; shows a converted sinner anticipating his sin to then be the head of the
Church. If there is one thing, if there is one thing that the leaders of the Church,
especially the Popes and Bishops – the Popes of the centuries and the Bishops also in
our time – if there is one virtue they need it is humility. And the most humiliating
experience that God can send us is the realization of our own past sins. God knows we
need it or needed to sin. And then Jesus three times asked him, “Do you love Me?” In
other words, that Peter then would give himself totally to Christ in a way that he
would not have done had he not sinned. And, over the centuries, the great masters of
the spiritual life have pointed out that it’s the great sinners over the centuries of the
Church’s history who have been the most zealous, fearless, and successful Apostles of
Christ. That’s the story of Peter, the story of Paul.

The story of my Jesuit father in God, St. Ignatius, one of the last things he had to do
before, well, he came to his senses was to provide for the child care of a child he
brought into the world, of course, outside of marriage. God, in other words, knows
how we need to realize His goodness to us and then nothing will stop a converted
sinner because then he realizes. First of all, the peace that comes, the deep peace of
the reality that I once more, I am once more in the friendship of God. And this is a
regular feature of people asking me and questions that come here too: how can I
convince a Protestant friend of mine that he or she should become a Catholic? Well,
there are a thousand good reasons, but all you’ve got to do is ask this Protestant,
“Have you sinned.” If he says no then he should be institutionalized. If he says yes,
now, “Do you want to be in God’s friendship?”

“Of course.”

“Are you sure you’re in God’s friendship?”

Well if he is a sober Protestant he will say, I hope so. But a Catholic does not have to
say I hope so. I know so. That’s with the Sacrament of Confession. And I’m now
working on that part of the Catechism, which is the Sacrament of Penance. The great
peace, Lord thanks. I’m back in your friendship. And you want to pass on that
experience to others.

Finally, The Repentant Thief. All kinds of other possibilities of either knowing being
crucified with Christ or totally different people. Well there were two. Both were justly
condemned to death. The first thief tells Jesus, “If you are the Christ save yourself and
us.” By the way as a Christian and as a Catholic, you never, never prefix the word if;
if the Pope is the head of the Church, if Christ is really present, if there is a heaven
then I’ll behave, if there is a hell then I won’t misbehave. There are no ifs in
Christianity. If implies a doubt. Only God knows, only He knows how absolutely
certain you are of your faith. But beg Him for having an absolutely,
uncompromisingly, undoubting faith. And this I can share with you. Over the years
I’ve been exposed already from childhood to people who did not have the faith. Then
as the mind grows you begin to ask questions, and we should ask questions of our
minds. But, in a show down, our faith is reasonable, it is rational, it is credible. But
once you say that our faith is credible then once you accept the Church’s teaching you
never question, never question whether what you believe is true. And these are the
most dangerous, and that’s a mild word, they are what I would call murderers of
people’s faith. The intellectuals, very gifted naturally, whose writing and whose
speaking I present: “Jesus probably did not say about eighty percent of the words
attributed to Him in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.” The scholars
say in a 575-page book to be released by the Macmillan Publishing Company on
Monday, that’s tomorrow. It’s called The Five Gospels, What did Jesus Really Say?
And the editor, I repeat, is a “theologian” from the De Paul University under the
Vincentians. Well this is, in other words, as I mentioned earlier, our media, now this
is The Detroit News or Free Press. Those are screeds. The paper is a waste of print.
But, and the very book remember, just before Christmas they made sure this was
issued to destroy our faith. They are being used, as we know, by the evil spirit, but my
hope is that out of contact with his demonic opposition to the faith we then, more than
ever, will study our faith. And let nobody ever tell you that what you believe should
be questioned or doubted as won by the faith on Calvary.

And the second thief first rebukes his fellow criminal and he admits we are receiving
what our days deserved. Then he turns to Jesus, “Lord remember me when you come
into your kingdom.” He believed. I think I mentioned this several times. On his first
visit to the United States our Holy Father pleaded with the bishops to restore the
Sacrament of Confession. There are parishes as you know where it’s almost
impossible to get to confession. And why? Because so many priests have lost their
faith. And if only they would have, at least have the honesty of leaving the Church.
But I am talking, I trust, to the right audience. I must believe, believe that there is a
God whom I offended when I sin. And, therefore, that this merciful God wants to
forgive me. No matter what the price may be I will pay it. So then Christ’s words to
the good thief, “This day you shall be with Me in Paradise;” the first canonization.
Again, Christ could not have made it, if I could use the word, more dramatic as to
why He came into the world. He came to save sinners. Only God knows how many
will be saved. Only He knows. What we do know is that to reach Heaven is not easy,
and Christ Himself tells us, “The way that leads to life is narrow,” and He, He says,
“And few there are who walk that way.” I tell people, “In the name of God, don’t take
a chance. There’s too big a risk, only one life here on earth to be sure you make it.
Expiate your sins because then you have guaranteed salvation.” Then some lessons
for us.

Recognize with the mind that I have done wrong. I mean it. There are people’s minds
who are anesthetized. They can do the most terrible things and they don’t realize
they’re sinning. Do you believe me? Absolutely blasé. In other words, to recognize
that I’ve done wrong. I’ve told this to more than one person, if you are going to bed
examine your conscience. If you cannot remember what you’ve done wrong stay
awake until you find out something you have done wrong.

Number two: become aware with the mind that I have offended God. The essence of
sin is that it offends God that God has loved me so much and I have been so
ungrateful. Then, humble admission by the will telling God I am sorry and mean it.
And during the day, as I’ve said how many times, cultivate the habit of keeping your
eyes open on your soul during the day. And remember no one but God can do it, to
become immediately, ask Our Lord to become immediately aware that you’ve done
something wrong right away. Then, humble acceptance by the will of suffering or
pain for having offended God. That’s why I keep repeating, as we say ad nocium, I
keep repeating, God puts suffering into our lives to give us the privilege of expiating
our own sins and the sins of others. And then resolving with the will not to sin again
and then make up for the sin by loving God more because of His mercy to me in the
past.
Understanding Sin Today

by Richard M. Gula, S.S.

"Bless me, Father, for I have sinned. It has been six weeks since my last
confession. I lost my patience three times; I lied twice; I missed Mass once; I had
impure thoughts twice and I gossiped about my neighbor four times."

Sound familiar? The above confession reflects an understanding of the moral life
and sin that prevailed among Roman Catholics for centuries. But in the last half of
this century, many changes have been occurring in the way we think about
morality and sin. These changes have resulted in part from new ways of
understanding what it means to be human. They also come from rediscovering old
ideas that the Bible and Jesus taught about how we ought to relate to God and to
one another.

Sin as crime

There was a time when Catholics thought that living morally was mostly a matter
of obeying the law—the divine law or the commandments of God, the ecclesial
(Church) laws or the natural laws expressed in the moral teaching of the Church.
"It's in the Bible" or "The Church says so" were often our most important reasons
for being moral.

Sin was like a crime, a transgression of the law. It was akin to breaking the speed
limit on the highway. The law is what made an action sinful. Where there was no
clear-cut law (no speed limit), there was no question of sin (go as fast as you want).

Catholic theology has since come to realize that the legal model for understanding
the moral life and sin is deficient. For one thing, the demands of being a faithful
follower of Jesus, of living according to the vision and values of the gospel, stretch
us farther than what can be prescribed by law.

But no one is trying to do away with laws. We know that laws will always be
necessary to help us live together well. Just as our city streets would be chaos
without traffic laws, so our living together would be a moral chaos without laws
like those about telling the truth, respecting property and protecting life.

But laws cannot possibly cover all the decisions that we have to make. The legal
model of the moral life too easily makes moral living a matter of repeating the
same old behaviors even though we—and our world—have changed. The legal
model also tends to focus too much on the actions that we do as being sinful or not.
Did I miss Mass? Did I cheat on an exam or on my taxes? Did I disobey my
parents?

Laws by themselves don't address the important realities of the heart, such as our
attitudes (Are we kind or hostile?), intentions (Do we strive to be helpful or self-
serving?) and ways of seeing things (Do we look through the eyes of faith? Are we
optimistic or pessimistic?). Jesus reminds us that what comes from the heart is
what makes one sinful. Sinful actions are like the tip of an iceberg being held
above the surface by a wayward heart (see Is 29:13; Mk 7:21; Mt 23:25-26; Lk
6:45).

The legal model also tends to make the moral life too centered on one's self. Sin
affects me and my salvation. Saving my soul through obedience is the guiding
moral principle according to this model. This leaves out, however, the all-
important relational dimensions of sin and conversion. As St. Paul teaches, no one
lives for oneself (Rom 14:7). As the Body of Christ, we suffer together and rejoice
together (1 Cor 12:26-27). Because we share a common world, we are part of a
network of relationships that joins each of us in responsibility to others and to all of
creation. We all know that we violate the ecological balance of nature when we put
toxins into our air and water or throw hamburger foil wrappers out the car window.
We violate our moral ecology when we create discord, dissension, fear, mistrust
and alienation in the web of life's relationships.

Sin's new look

A new look at the moral life has been informed by the biblical renewal in the
Church and by some philosophical shifts within the Church and society.

For example, the biblical renewal has given us covenant, heart and conversion—
not law—as our primary moral concepts. Responsibility has replaced obligation as
the primary characteristic of the moral life. Shifts in philosophy have emphasized
the dignity of persons and the value of sharing life in society. Together these shifts
in theology and philosophy support a relational model of the moral life. The
relational model emphasizes personal responsibility for protecting the bonds of
peace and justice that sustain human relationships.

What might a contemporary confession sound like that reflects the relational model
of the moral life?

"Bless me, Father, for I have sinned. It has been six weeks since my last
confession. I am a husband, a father of three teenage children, and I hold an
executive position in a large computer firm.

"Over the past month I have allowed love to grow cold at home and in my work. At
home, I have been inattentive to my wife and children as I allowed my new projects
at work to consume most of my time and attention. I have spent more time at work
and little time with the family. At work, I have selfishly neglected to disclose some
data which my colleagues needed for a new project. I wanted to gain the glory. I
have also failed to support a female colleague who was clearly being sexually
harassed and I failed to confront those who were doing the harassing.

"I think a good penance for me, Father, would be to take the family on a picnic this
week and to make a special effort to affirm my junior colleagues for the great work
they have been doing."

This penitent senses how he is affecting the quality of life and love in his primary
relationships. He also knows what he can do to show conversion. His confession
reflects contemporary theology's emphasis on responsibility to others over the
traditional overemphasis on what is allowed or forbidden by law. Rather than
focusing just on committing sinful acts, it shows that sin is also an omission, a
failure to do what ought to be done.

Far from doing away with sin, contemporary theology admits that sin is very much
with us and touches us more deeply than we realize. Greed, violence, corruption,
poverty, hunger, sexism and oppression are too prevalent to ignore.

Sin is just as basic a term in our Christian vocabulary today as it has been in the
past. Its root sense means to be disconnected from God through the failure to love.
In sin, we simply don't bother about anyone outside ourselves. Sin is first a matter
of a selfish heart—a refusal to care—before it shows itself in actions. Because
loving God and loving our neighbor are all tied together, sin will always be
expressed in and through our relationships.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church affirms that, just as the least of our acts
done in charity has some benefit for all, so every sin causes some harm. The
Catechism quotes Scripture to make this point: "None of us lives for oneself, and
none of us dies for oneself" (Rom 14:7); "If one member suffers, all suffer
together; if one member is honored, all rejoice together. Now you are the body of
Christ and individually members of it" (1 Cor 12:26-27); "Charity does not insist
on its own way" (1 Cor 13:5; see 10:24). In this solidarity with all people, says the
Catechism, "living or dead, which is founded on the communion of saints, the least
of our acts done in charity redounds to the profit of all. Every sin harms this
communion" (#953).

One of the most obvious changes in a contemporary approach to sin is the

emphasis given to how sin affects the quality of life and love in our relationships.
Sin is any action or omission that hinders, violates or breaks right relationships
which support human well-being. For example, if I spread gossip or fail to correct a
false rumor about a co-worker, I am not only failing in my relationship to that
person, but also impairing the quality of life in the workplace.

My favorite example of how this relational vision of sin and the moral life
influenced another's behavior came from my five-year-old niece, Julia. She listened
to a conversation I was having with her eight-year-old sister about what she was
being taught in her preparation for first Penance. The lesson on sin was filled with
stories of relationships and the difference between loving and unloving choices.
The next day, when Julia came home from kindergarten, I asked her how her day
was. She said, "I had a good day." When I asked her what made it good, she said,
"I had an opportunity to make a loving choice. Kenny forgot to bring a snack
today, so I gave him one of my pretzels."

Julia learned quite well that right moral living begins with caring for one another:
paying attention to another's needs and acting in a way that enhances another's
well-being. Sin, by contrast, turns in and sets oneself against another. Self-serving
interests destroy the bonds of peace and justice that ought to sustain us.

Original sin didn't go away

In an age when evils on a massive scale frequently make front-page news (wars,
ethnic genocide, bombings, terrorism), theologians are trying to revive the doctrine
of original sin. This doctrine tells us that there is more evil in the world than that
which we cause ourselves. Consider the children being born in Rwanda or Bosnia
today. They are affected and infected by the evil that surrounds them before they
are ever able to make choices of their own.

Original sin is the face of sin which we recognize as the condition of evil into
which we are all born. It is a condition of being human that makes us feel as if our
freedom were bound by chains from the very beginning. We feel the effects of this
evil in the pull towards selfishness which alienates us from our deeper selves, from
others and from God. Because of original sin, we will always know struggle and
tragedy as part of our life.

While the power of original sin pulls us in the direction of selfishness and
aloofness, the power of grace moves us to be for others and to live mutually
dependent on one another. The film Schindler's List shows how Oskar Schindler
witnessed to this power of grace in the way he saved thousands of Jews from the
death camps. So did the many unnamed heroines and heroes who helped the
victims of the bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building in 1995. So do those
who open their homes to refugees of war and poverty.

In order to rise above the power of evil, we need to open ourselves to the presence
of redeeming love. This love comes to us through others witnessing to justice, truth
and peace. While the presence of original sin may make responsible moral living a
truly demanding task, the presence of redeeming love makes it possible. This is the
sense of St. Paul's conviction that while sin abounds, grace abounds even more
(Rom 5:20).

Social sin—a life of its own

Social sin has been around as long as civilization, but it is a relatively new concept
for Catholics. We have tended to focus exclusively on personal (actual) sin: lying,
cheating, missing Mass. We have not paid sufficient attention to social structures
and customs which hold such sinful practices in place. We are changing, however.
One clear example of a rising social consciousness can be seen in Pope John Paul
II's 1995 "Letter to Women." Here he publicly acknowledges sexism as a social sin
and then goes on to apologize to women for the ways the Church has complied in
denigrating women, misrepresenting them, reducing them to servitude and
marginalizing them from society.

Social sin describes human-made structures when they offend human dignity by
causing people to suffer oppression, exploitation or marginalization. These include
educational systems, housing policies, tax structures, immigration policies, health-
care systems, employment policies, a market economy. Once established, social
structures and customs seem to take on a life of their own. The social sin of racism,
for example, has continued and still continues long after slavery was abolished. For
example, there remain obstacles to adequate education, to housing, to work,
sometimes even to voting.
We learn to live in a world with these structures. We presume that the social
customs which they hold in place are good, traditional customs. That is what makes
social sin so difficult to recognize and to change. Yet the evil of sinful social
structures abounds in all forms of discrimination, racism and sexism; in the
exploitation of migrant workers; in the illiteracy and homelessness of the poor; in
the lack of basic health care for all; in the manipulation of consumers by the
manufacturing practices, advertising, pricing policies and packaging of goods; and
in many other practices which we continue to support more out of ignorance than
meanness. Why does social sin prevail? Largely because we fail to name social
evils and seek to correct them.

Christianity could easily adopt the motto of Missouri: "Show me." It is not enough
to talk a good game. The moral teachings of the prophets (see Is 58:6-8) and of
Jesus (see the Sermon on the Mount, Mt 5—7) tell us that faith and piety without
active commitment to justice are not what God wants.

When we become aware of structural evils, we should not be paralyzed by the guilt
of self-condemnation, but moved to conversion. Conversion from social sin
involves, at one level, changing our own lifestyle in ways that will help reform
society. We cannot do everything to end the structures which support sexism, for
example, but we can do some things, for instance, curbing our use of exclusive and
insensitive language. We can influence others' attitudes through the ways we talk to
and about one another. At another level, conversion from social sin involves
examining existing regulations and practices, reforming those that offend human
dignity.

Actual sin—we all know it

Another face of sin is personal sin. Our traditional way of distinguishing the
degrees of gravity of personal sins is to call them mortal and venial sins.

Catholics traditionally have been taught that for sin to be mortal, three conditions
have to be met: 1) serious matter; 2) sufficient reflection; 3) full consent of the
will. These are still valuable criteria. They are comprehensive in including
conditions which pertain to the action (1) and to the person (2 & 3) before we can
speak of mortal sin in its truest sense.

The relational model of the moral life helps us to understand actual sin as primarily
an expression of the person in relationship, not simply as disobedience to the law.

Mortal sin. Mortal sin is a serious break in a relationship of love with God,
neighbor, world and self. We can think of it as a radical No to God and to others. It
happens when we refuse to live in a positive, life-giving way. Just as acts of
heroism and extraordinary generosity are evidence of our capacity to say a radical
Yes to God, so calculated acts permeated with malice are evidence of our capacity
to say No to God. Mortal sin involves a moral evil done by a person who is
supremely selfish and committed to making evil and not goodness the
characteristic mark of his or her life.
While we would not be surprised to find mortal sin in those who choose to make
crime, extortion or greed a way of life, we must still be wary of judging another.
No one can ever know for sure just by looking from the sidelines whether a
particular act of malice is a mortal sin or not. We need to know more about the
person's knowledge, freedom and fundamental disposition before God. We must
refrain from judging others as being in mortal sin, even though we know their acts
are permeated with evil. That is why the Church has never taught that anyone is, in
fact, in hell. At the same time the Church acknowledges that we all have the
capacity to cut ourselves off from the source of life that is God, which is a good
description of hell.

Venial sin. These days people are not giving enough attention to immoral acts of
less importance than mortal sin. If mortal sin radically reverses one's positive
relationship to God, the habit of unloving acts can corrode that relationship. This is
why we must take venial sins seriously. Venial sins can weigh us down with the
anchor of bad habits.

Venial sin often enters our lives when we fail to show care for others. People can
easily become submerged in self-interest. Perhaps we speak sharply to another,
revel in our piece of gossip or exercise a power play over another that keeps us
secure and in control. While these acts of selfish arrogance do not radically turn us
away from God, they are inconsistent with our basic commitment to be for life and
for love. They are venial sins.

Contemporary notions of sin emphasize the gospel's call to conversion in and

through the web of life's relationships. The more clearly we can recognize God's
presence and love in these relationships, the more clearly we can recognize our
venial sins, and the more seriously we can take them. Without recognizing our
sinfulness, we cannot grow in converting to the demands of love.

God is merciful

These are only some of the significant changes in our understanding of sin. We are
talking about sin differently today because the relational model of the moral life
has replaced the legal model. One thing that hasn't changed, though, is our concept
of God's love and mercy. We do not believe that God wants us to be weighed down
with a distorted sense of guilt and responsibility. Rather, we believe that we are
called to participate more fully in the creative power of God calling us to
reconciliation, to reconnect with our best selves, with others, with the world and
with God.

The Sacrament of Penance and Reconciliation is an opportunity and invitation to

heal the brokenness in our lives and to set relationships right. We should give more
attention to celebrating this gift, especially during the seasons of Lent and Advent.

Richard M. Gula, S.S., a Sulpician priest, is the professor of moral theology at

the Franciscan School of Theology of the Graduate Theological Union in
Berkeley, California. He is the author of numerous articles and books, including
his latest book, Ethics and Pastoral Ministry (Paulist Press, 1996).