Dist. 21, Part 1, Art. 1, Q. 2
by St. Bonaventure
Source text: Public Domain Mark 1.0. English translation/apparatus/encoding: CC BY-NC 4.0, Wroot Press.
https://bonaventure.wrootpress.com/browse/4/d/21/q/bon-sent-IV-d21-p1-a1-q2
----------------------------------------
### Question II. *Whether venial sins can be destroyed by grace without contrition or interior pain.*

Secondly it is asked, concerning this, whether venial sins can be destroyed by grace without contrition or interior pain. And it seems that they can:

1. By that which is had in the text, which is a saying of Gregory: "What a drop of water is to the furnace of fire, this the venial sin is to the fervor of charity": therefore it seems that a venial sin can be destroyed by the fervor of charity alone.

2. Likewise, as is gathered from the words of Augustine in the book of the *Confessions*, a venial sin is nothing other than a lesser love of God: therefore that which excludes the lessening of love excludes and destroys the venial sin; but charity, with no meditation made, can be inflamed more and more: therefore etc.

3. Likewise, it is possible that a just man who has venial sins die in his sleep, or in such a way that he falls into a frenzy: therefore, since beyond there is no place for penitence, and it is necessary that those venial sins be destroyed, because at some point, since he has grace, he will arrive at glory: therefore venial sins can be destroyed by grace without penitence.

4. Likewise, a mortal sin disproportionately offends God more than a venial one; but the least contrition suffices to destroy a mortal sin together with grace: therefore to destroy a venial sin grace alone suffices.

5. Likewise, venial sins are destroyed by the power of the Sacrament of extreme unction, and also by the power of the eucharist — as was held above, and as Ambrose expressly says — and through the Lord's prayer and the episcopal blessing, as the masters commonly say: therefore it is not necessary to be contrite, because there is another way of destruction. — Since, therefore, they are remitted through these and also through contrition and exterior satisfaction and through baptism; it is asked, through what common nature this common property belongs to these.

**On the contrary:**
1. In the sixteenth distinction above it is had, where the remission of venial sins or penitence is treated — the Master says — that "for the remission of venial sins the Lord's prayer suffices together with some fasting and almsgiving; yet so that some little contrition precede": therefore for that fault no fitting satisfaction can be made, unless interior penitence precede: therefore etc.

2. Likewise, a venial sin is of greater adherence than a mortal one; but a mortal sin is never destroyed, unless free choice dissent from it through an act of contrition: therefore much more strongly does it seem so of the venial sin.

3. Likewise, when any two forms are mutually compatible, one does not of itself expel the other; but a venial sin stands together with grace: therefore grace of itself does not destroy the venial sin: therefore it is necessary that something further be added which has opposition to the venial sin. But this is nothing other than interior penitence: therefore etc.

4. Likewise, the reason why a mortal sin cannot be destroyed without an act of detestation is that it was committed by the will and by the accepting will, and therefore it cannot be destroyed except by the detesting will; but venial sins are for the most part committed voluntarily and endure in us, so long as the will wishes to be engaged in such things: therefore it seems that venial sins cannot be destroyed without internal contrition.

5. Likewise, it is possible for one venial sin to be destroyed without another; but this is only through something which regards one venial sin more than another, by reason of which the effect of grace is rather upon the one than upon the other; but such a thing is not grace nor a Sacrament, but only the interior act of free choice: therefore etc.

> **Conclusion.** Although venial sins are very fittingly destroyed through penitence, nevertheless they can be destroyed through grace otherwise aided, namely by free choice alone consenting, and by something assisting from without.

**I respond:** It must be said that to this some have wished to say that venial sins, because they are in a certain way voluntary, cannot be destroyed without an act of the will detesting them. Yet because they have far less of the character of the voluntary than mortal sins, therefore however small a contrition suffices, whether in general or in particular. Whence they said that if anyone die impenitent of venial sins, he sins mortally; but if anyone die without the use of free choice, afterward they are destroyed through grace with voluntary detestation. For the soul, which is in grace, as soon as it beholds the fault in itself, detests it, and the grace existing in the soul destroys it. — Yet this is difficult to maintain both in this world and in the world to come: in this world, I say, because there are many ways of remitting venial sins besides penitence, as for example when someone devoutly receives the episcopal blessing and the sprinkling of blessed water and the like; in the world to come, because, since there is no meritorious use of free choice after death, in no way does it seem possible that grace destroy the fault, with the motion of the will of the soul already stripped cooperating. And so this manner of speaking does not seem altogether fitting.

On account of this, therefore, it must be said otherwise. And that we may understand the manner of the destruction of venial sins, it must be noted that there is a threefold kind of sin, namely original, actual mortal, and venial. And the first indeed has the least character of the voluntary, nay rather it has no character of the voluntary in us. But the other kind of sin, namely mortal, simply holds the character of the voluntary, although not in the way that the sin of Adam did, which had no inclining cause. The venial sin in a certain way holds the middle. Whence in a certain way it has the character of punishment, in a certain way of fault; and again in a certain way it is voluntary, in a certain way involuntary. For we have a necessity of committing some venial sin in general, although not any one in particular.

The first sin, therefore, since it is contracted from elsewhere, can be destroyed with free choice doing nothing at all, but with the Sacrament alone assisting from without, as is plain in little children. — The second kind of sin, since it is contracted voluntarily, cannot be destroyed except with free choice consenting and assisting; therefore in the justification of the impious a motion of free choice is required, by which it consents to grace, and further a contrition, by which it assists. — The venial sin can be destroyed with free choice consenting and something assisting from without; whence if free choice does not resist grace by willing to persist in the fault, and grace is strengthened by the power of a Sacrament or of a sacramental, it destroys the venial fault either universally or particularly. Whence it must be believed that, when someone is thinking nothing of his sins, but only recollecting the Passion of Christ in the Sacrament of the eucharist, recollecting, I say, fervently, the venial sins, either all or some, are remitted to him through grace thus aided. And all those things — whether sacraments or sacramentals, such as the eucharist and unction and baptism and the sprinkling of water and the episcopal blessing and contrition and the showing of mercy and the devout entreaty of the Lord's prayer — contribute to the destruction of venial sins, not through their proper nature, but through that nature by which they assist and strengthen grace-making-pleasing toward this act.

If you ask: how do they assist? it must be said that in such things there is for the most part humility and devotion, which is an act informed by grace, repugnant to the venial sin itself, which diminishes, so far as is of itself, the fervor of charity and devotion. Or by that reason by which there is in them a penal quality, which is repugnant to disordered delight, insofar as that punishment is joined to the order of grace. — And so it can be answered that although venial sins are very fittingly destroyed through penitence, they can nevertheless be destroyed through grace otherwise aided. — And the reasons adduced for this are to be conceded.

1. To that, then, which is objected, that some little contrition ought to precede; it must be said that the Master does not determine precisely the manner of destroying the venial sin, but the manner of satisfying perfectly. But no one satisfies perfectly for a fault, unless he also grieve interiorly in his heart, however much he does not punish himself exteriorly; and this I say either in general or in particular. But venial sins can be destroyed not only by the power of penitence, but also by other ways, as has been touched on.

2. To that which is objected, that a venial sin is of greater adherence; it must be said that there are two ways of speaking of the adherence of a venial sin: either as to the stain, or as to the proneness, which is the way to it. If we speak as to the mark of displeasing, a mortal sin adheres more than a venial. But if as to proneness, it is the contrary; but destruction is not with respect to proneness, but rather with respect to the stain of sin.

3. To that which is objected, that a venial sin is compatible with grace etc.; it must be said that it is true that it is compatible as to inherence; and therefore grace does not destroy through its essence or inherence; and on account of this it must have added to it some aid, whether of free choice, or of some other penal quality, or of a Sacrament, by reason of which the effect or act of grace is repugnant to the venial sin. For although grace according to essence stands together with the venial sin, nevertheless charity excited to fervor consumes the fault, as the furnace of fire consumes a slight drop of water.

4. To that which is objected, that a venial sin is voluntary; it must be said that it is not so as a mortal sin is; yet, because it is in some way voluntary, it is never destroyed unless the will consents. Whence it scarcely happens, for one who proposes to remain in venial sin, as for instance in idle words, that even if he confess, the fault be remitted to him, unless perhaps for that deed he rise up against himself, and the roaring of reason so rages that the bestial motions of sensuality fix their step, after the manner of the lion, at whose roaring the other animals fix their step.

5. To that which is objected, that one venial sin is destroyed without another; it must be said that this is possible in two ways: either because the will adheres dispositionally to one and not to another; and then the fault is remitted to which it does not inhere, and the fault remains to which the will adhered; or for this reason, because the will detests one sin more than another. Whence grace destroys more the venial fault in whose destruction the will more consents or assists.

---