That  all  sins  are  equal  in  enormity,  no  one
asserts.  That  there  is  the  gravest  difference
between  sins  committed  habitually,  delibe-


MORTAL  AND    VENIAL   SIN.  31

rately,  and  knowingly  on  the  one  hand,  and
sins  committed  through  want  of  knowledge
and  through  infirmity  on  the  other,  no  one
disputes.  But  the  true  seat  of  sin  is  in  the
heart.  If  the  rules  set  before  a  sinner  are
tabulated  human  definitions — which,  even  if
they  were  theoretically  exact,  must,  in  their
application  to  any  particular  case,  be  liable
to  uncertainty,  through  human  ignorance —
will  not  the  result  be  the  creation  of  an
artificial  morality,  extremely  different  in  its
method  from  what  we  find  in  the  New  Testa-
ment, and  therefore  unfavourable  to  the
formation  of  Christian  character  ?  How  can
such  a  system  be  otherwise  than  unsound
and  dangerous  ?  All  sin  is  so  dreadful  in
itself,  so  abhorrent  to  God,  that  it  must  be
harmful  to  draw  distinctions  of  this  kind,
especially  if  they  run  into  minute  detail.
What  we  want  is  an  instinctive,  God-like
abhorrence  of  all  sin :  and  to  divide  sins
theoretically  into  venial  and  mortal,  curiously
to  study  the  fine  and  subtle  lines  by  which
the  two  classes  can  be  discriminated,  and


32  SACRAMENTAL    CONFESSION.
practically  to  lead  men  to  connect  their  hopes
and  fears  with  these  distinctions,  cannot  be
conducive  to  this  holy  God-like  instinct.
But  when  this  distinction  of  mortal  sins
from  venial  is  used  by  a  priesthood,  whose
office  it  is  to  decide  for  a  sinner  between
temporary  suffering  and  eternal  separation
from  God,  then  a  new  element  of  the  most
terrible  kind  is  introduced  into  the  question.
