Bibliotheca Arnamagnæana - 01.06.1996, Side 160

150
Et quamvis apostolus capitalia plura commemoraverit, nos tamen ... breviter
dicimus quae illa sint. Sacrilegium, homicidium, adulterium, falsum testimo-
nium, furtum, rapina, superbia, invidia, avaritia, et, si longo tempore tenea-
tur, iracundia, ebrietas, si assidua sit, et detractio in eorum numero compu-
tantur.32
After rendering Caesarius’ comments on the nature of great and small
sins, and the way in which small transgressions disfigure the soul (Spec.
Pen. 149ff.), the Icelandic author returns to CTV as his source for most
of the rest of his treatise. The account of the progress of sin, originating
in thought, growing in delight, taking effect in consent, and finding
completion in deed (Spec. Pen. 153-155) finds a parallel at CTV III.v.
92A, 25-28. Discussions of the threefold nature of venial sin at Spec.
Pen. 155-159 and 160-164 correspond to CTV III.x. 100B, 22-34 and
CTV Ill.xii. 102A, 15-25, respectively. The minute classification of the
seven deadly sins presented in Spec. Pen. 165-322 is based on various
sections of CTV III.xiv, xv, xxii-xxviii, and xxi, in that order.33
The homilist departs from CTV III, which has provided most of the
material for the first part of his treatise, at Spec. Pen. 324, the beginning
of a recapitulation of the difference between venial and mortal sins.
Here it is observed that although a man may not escape all sin, a good
man can avoid sin if he repents as soon as he is conscious of an evil
thought, so that sin can make no progress in his consent or in his will.
Such sins, the author notes, are termed ‘venial’, since they are immedi-
ately forgiven, because they are not voluntary. Mortal sins, on the other
hånd, are subject to one’s will; for everyone who knows how to recog-
nize and distinguish them can escape them. The author notes that the
reader (whom he addresses affectionately as ‘my dear friend’, minn
kæri vin, Spec. Pen. 331), will understand more clearly the extent to
which mortal sin is subject to one’s will if he thinks of man’s will as a
king and his reason as a counsellor. The counsellor carefully distin-
32 Caesarius of Arles, Sermo 179.2, D.G. Morin, ed., Sancti Caesarii Arelatensis Ser-
mones, ed. 2, CCSL 104, pp. 724-725. Caesarius’ discussion of great and small sins is
sometimes incorporated in penitential manuals. Compare, for example, the long quotation
from Caesarius’ Sermo 179 in Chobham’s Summa Confessorum, where it is also ascribed
to Augustine. (See Chobham, Summa Confessorum, Art. III, Dist. I, Questio Ila., pp. 17-
19). It is not unlikely that the author of Spec. Pen. knew Caesarius’ treatment of small and
great sins from such an intermediate source. For the full parallel text, see Appendix I, p.
171. Compare further discussion of this parallel, below, p. 165.
33 For the Latin parallel to Spec. Pen. 153-322, see Appendix I, pp. 172-178.