It

It

The following is based on an amusing and insightful column that first appeared in The National Catholic Reporter in December of 1982. The title of the column was “New light on ‘it’ and other mortal sins,” and the author was Kieran Quinn. The main reason we are discussing the article “second-hand,” aside from the difficulty in obtaining reprint permission (the author held the rights and is deceased), is that Quinn actually named ‘it.’ We are not so bold because, as Quinn pointed out, ‘it’ is “indelicate, even embarrassing.” Nonetheless, the topic must be broached because, as pointed out in our Mission Statement, no topic is off limits here.

The purpose of Quinn’s essay was to meditate on the fact that ‘it’ is no longer a mortal sin. Mortal sins, if you need reminding, are the very serious ones which, if not formally forgiven by confession (nowadays called reconciliation) before you die, condemn you to Hell for all eternity. If you find this hard to believe, unearth a copy of the Baltimore Catechism.

That ‘it” was no longer a mortal sin reflected a change in theological perspective following Vatican II. Theologians shifted from a focus on isolated acts to an assessment of one’s life as a whole. As a result, you now had to be “a complete degenerate, a ne’er-do-well of epic proportion, a 24 karat gold plated s. o. b.” to be accused of mortal sin.

Another exception from mortal sin for traditionalists who like to focus on isolated acts is the principle of full consent. The idea is that full consent of the will is a requirement for mortal sin. If you don’t give full and unreserved consent to the sinful activity, then it can be no more than a venial sin, the less serious type of sin. This exception has been around for a long time and is even included in the Baltimore Catechism. It has been widely employed in the post-Vatican II era by those seeking to escape condemnation for ‘it’ and other “indelicate” activities.

The amusing part of Quinn’s article was his description of the harrowing experience endured by pre-Vatican II adolescents when navigating ‘it’ in the confessional. In close-knit communities, everybody knew everybody, so the priest on the other side of the grill knew who you were by the sound of your voice. You couldn’t bring yourself to be explicit, so you said you did “something bad.” The priest leaned in like a raptor sensing prey and asked when it happened. You said, in a voice as soft as possible, “at night.” That sealed the deal. If you managed to choose the right priest (a subject explored at some length by Quinn), you were advised to “put a rosary under your pillow,” and then given your penance. Quinn says he tried the rosary strategy. It didn’t work.

Now for the insightful part of the article. After chronicling the change in theological perspective and his own harrowing personal experiences with ‘it,’ Quinn came to the following conclusion: “If you take seriously what moral theologians say on any subject, especially in the (deleted) sphere, you ought to have your head examined.” Common sense is a much better guide.

And that is just about all there is to

It.