For those who believe in the distinction between mortal and venial sin, 1 John 5:16-17 is often a go-to text. Even the Catechism of the Catholic Church references this text (1854) in support of its teaching on mortal and venial sin. Here’s the text:

If anyone sees his brother committing what is not a deadly sin, he will ask, and God will give him life for those whose sin is not deadly. There is sin which is deadly; I do not say that one is to pray for that. All wrongdoing is sin, but there is sin which is not deadly.

A sin that is “not deadly,” so it’s argued, is simply what is meant by venial sin—a sin that doesn’t cause the loss of sanctifying grace (divine life) in the soul. By contrast, the sin that “leads to death” refers to a mortal sin—a sin that does cause the loss of sanctifying grace (divine life) in the soul.

But some argue this reading of the text is flawed. Their proposed reading suggests the distinction between “non-deadly” and “deadly” tracks the distinction between the sins of a true born-again Christian and an unbeliever. For example, Todd Baker writes,

The sin leading not to spiritual/eternal death is applicable only for the believer, whereas the sin leading to spiritual/eternal death is exclusively applicable to the unbeliever.

What drives Baker’s interpretation is his presupposed view that Christians are secure in their salvation. Since a true born-again believer can’t lose the “eternal” life, which he initially receives when he professes faith in Christ, his sin can’t lead to spiritual death. The sin of an unbeliever, on the other hand, does lead to spiritual death because he’s outside Christ.

Concerning John’s instruction to pray that God may give life for the sin that doesn’t lead to death, Baker (along with others) says this refers to a prayer for God not to punish the Christian for a heinous sin with premature physical death, the way he judged Ananias and Saphira with premature death by lying to the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:1-11) and those who partook of the Eucharist without discerning the body (1 Corinthians 11:29-30).

For the unbeliever who commits a sin that leads to death, John refrains from offering any instruction to pray for such individuals. Baker doesn’t give a reason why this is so. Perhaps the reason is that he thinks John is focused solely on helping born-again Christians avoid premature death and has no interest in showing affection for the staunch unbeliever.

What should we make of this proposed reading of the text?

For starters, Baker’s interpretation rests on his belief that Christians are secure in their salvation. So for someone who rejects this belief, Baker’s interpretation is going to be suspect.

However, putting Baker’s presuppositions aside, one thing his interpretation has going for it, in contrast to the mortal/venial sin reading, is that it seems to make better sense of John’s instruction to pray for God to give life for the sin that doesn’t lead to death.

On the mortal/venial sin reading, this instruction seems unintelligible. Why would we ask God to give spiritual life to a Christian for a “non-deadly” sin when such a Christian already has such life? Remember, a “non-deadly” sin doesn’t cause the loss of sanctifying grace in the soul. Physical life, therefore, seems to be a better fit for the “life” that John speaks of, and thereby makes prayer for a preservation from premature death a better fit for the prayer that John encourages his readers to offer to God.

In response, the prayer for “life” isn’t necessarily out of place on the mortal/venial sin reading. Within the theological framework of those who believe in mortal and venial sin, especially Catholic theology, a Christian can grow in sanctifying grace, or the divine life. Thus, the prayer for God to give life to those who have committed a sin that doesn’t lead to death could be interpreted as a prayer for God to increase sanctifying grace within the soul, thereby strengthening the Christian to face sin in the future.

Furthermore, Baker’s interpretation introduces an unnatural distinction between “death” and “life” in the text. Baker affirms that John is speaking of spiritual death concerning both kinds of sin: the sin committed by the born-again Christian (the sin that doesn’t lead to death) and the sin of the unbeliever (the sin that leads to death).

If the “death” that John speaks of is spiritual death, and John contrasts this “death” with “life” in the immediate context, then a natural reading of “life” would be spiritual life. Yet Baker insists that “life” refers to physical life, thereby making John’s distinction between “death” and “life” to be one of spiritual death and physical life. A bit strained? Indeed!

The force of such a strain becomes even stronger when we consider that John already juxtaposed “death” and “life” just two chapters earlier and clearly refers to spiritual death and spiritual life. Consider, for example, 1 John 3:14: “We know that we have passed out of death into life, because we love the brethren. He who does not love remains in death.”

Baker’s interpretation fails to consider not only the juxtaposition between spiritual “death” and “life,” but also the chapter’s wider context of John’s use of “life.” In verse 11, John speaks of the “eternal life” that God gives us and how such “life is in the Son.” John continues in verse 12, writing, “He who has the Son has life; he who has not the Son of God has not life.” John isn’t speaking of physical life here. He’s talking about the life of God that dwells in our souls as born-again Christians—what we call sanctifying grace.

Now, what of John’s statement concerning the sin that leads to death: “I do not say that one is to pray for that”?

The first thing to note is that John doesn’t forbid such prayer. He simply refrains from giving the instruction that prayers should be offered for such a sin.

But why refrain?

Scholars admit that this is a bit of a mystery. However, as nineteenth-century biblical commentator J. MacEvilly puts forth, one possible explanation is that John doesn’t have the same certitude about God’s will concerning the different sins. Note that the verses about prayers for sin, and the lack thereof, are governed by verses 14-15, where John speaks of the knowledge we have that God hears our requests, the assumption being that God answers our requests if they conform to his divine will.

Well, concerning the prayer for God to give life to a sinner who’s committed only sins that don’t lead to death, we know it’s God’s will to communicate spiritual life through our prayer because that’s how he set it up. As members of the mystical body of Christ, we communicate grace to one another through intercessory prayer (“The eye cannot say to the hand, I have no need of you”—1 Cor. 12:21).

But for those who are outside the body, we don’t know with the same certitude whether God wills to communicate the grace of repentance through our intercessory prayer. There is no direct causation of grace in such cases. Thus, we can’t know for sure and thereby can only implore for God’s mercy. It’s possible that this lack of certitude is what motivates John to refrain from offering direct instruction for his readers to pray that God communicate life, lest they have false hope that God will hear this prayer.

So, upon an initial reading, Baker’s interpretation has some traction and can at least give someone pause from immediately concluding that 1 John 5:16-17 speaks of the mortal/venial sin distinction. But when pressed, the mortal/venial sin reading seems to retain better explanatory power. Thus, believers in the mortal/venial sin distinction, including the Catholic Church, can continue to appeal to 1 John 5:16-17 for biblical support.

***This article was originally published by Catholic Answers Magazine Online on April 23, 2024.