If Jesus does not both shock and disturb when He speaks to us through the Scriptures, then we aren’t taking Him seriously enough. Take as an example this Sunday’s Gospel when Jesus, Mercy Incarnate, returns to Galilee and accuses the scribes of doing the seemingly impossible—committing a sin that will not be forgiven. “Truly I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men and whatever blasphemies they utter; but whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness but is guilty of an eternal sin” (Mk 3:28-29). These words ought to shake us, especially in an age of exaggerated mercy. While Jesus leaves us clues as to the nature of this unpardonable sin, He does not really come out and tell us what it is. Therefore, there can be great spiritual benefit in investigating this question more deeply.
St Thomas Aquinas found this to be a question of particular importance as well and includes it among the questions dealing with sins against faith. Standing on the shoulders of his saintly predecessors, the Angelic Doctor says that there are three traditional ways in which this has been interpreted.
The First Two Interpretations
The first is the literal meaning based on the context in which Christ said it. To utter a blasphemy against the Holy Spirit (or God in general) is to ascribe to the devil that which comes by the power of God. The best historical example of this is the Golden Calf in which an Egyptian god (which St. Augustine says was actually a demon) is said to have led Israel out of Egypt. So clear was the action of God in rescuing them that the Israelites could not have acted out either weakness or ignorance. Therefore there is no excuse in receiving punishment and the sin is unpardonable. Returning to the passage however, Jesus is not condemning the Scribes per se, but instead issuing a warning. Because Our Lord had yet to reveal His divinity, they acted out of ignorance, an ignorance He reminds the Father of from the Cross (c.f. Lk 23:34).
This is related to the second interpretation that Aquinas mentions. He says it is a sin against the Holy Spirit specifically because it is a sin of malice. Because power is appropriated to the Father, to sin against the Father is a sin of weakness. Likewise, because wisdom is appropriated to the Son Who is the Word, ignorance is a sin against the Son. And because goodness is appropriated to the Holy Spirit, then a sin against the Holy Spirit is a sin of malice. With full consent and full knowledge, a sin against the Holy Spirit is a sin of malice, that is in essence saying “evil be my good.” This particular sin is the eternal sin because it removes all of those things from us that might be a cure. It creates a hardening of the heart like Pharaoh in which the grace of conversion cannot penetrate.
As a fruitful tangent, the doctrine of appropriation in which we ascribe to specific persons of the Trinity that which in truth is an action of all three is not only a way in which we learn more about the life within the Trinity, but also a way to develop a relationship with each of the Persons individually. When we need strength we should pray directly to the Father, wisdom to the Son and power over evil the Holy Spirit. This habit of prayer and personal relationship keeps us falling into the trap of believing the doctrine of the Trinity while not really believing in the Trinity.
A Third Interpretation
The third interpretation that Aquinas mentions is also the most favored today, although often in an overly simplistic way. Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit can be viewed as final impenitence. In this interpretation, the blasphemy occurs not necessarily in word, but in thought or deed. It is against the Holy Spirit because it acts contrary to the forgiveness of sins which is the work of the Holy Spirit (c.f. Jn 20:22). It is also the favored interpretation of the Great Mercy Pope, St. John Paul II. In his encyclical on the Holy Spirit, Dominum et Vivificantem he says that “the blasphemy against the Holy Spirit consists precisely in the radical refusal to accept this forgiveness, of which he is the intimate giver and which presupposes the genuine conversion which he brings about in the conscience” (DV, 46).
Standing on the shoulders of these saintly giants then, why is this most widely accepted answer overly simplistic? Because there are two ways in which final impenitence can manifest itself. First there is the obvious stubborn refusal even on one’s death bed, call it an impenitence of the will, to repent. But there is a second, and for many of us more dangerous way, and that is through what we might call an impenitence of fact. Although many of us envision our deaths being something we can plan for, the truth is that many of us die suddenly without much warning at all. That means our temporal impenitence can become final impenitence.
This final impenitence in fact is not necessarily brought about by a hardness of heart, but we become victims to Aquinas’ insight that the sin “unforgivable by its very nature, insofar as it excludes the elements through which the forgiveness of sin takes place.”
In short, we simply a refusal to examine ourselves well and are blocked by presumption. Fear of the Lord, through which we seek the forgiveness of sins is a certain (healthy) anxiety by which we recognize that in truth we are fugitives from hell and that it is only God’s mercy that saves us. This is healthy not because we are morbid, but because each time we accuse ourselves of a sin, we are humbled and God is glorified in His mercy. Each time we stir up sorrow for our sins, God is glorified in His mercy. And ultimately this is why, no matter how we interpret the passage, we should take Our Lord’s warning to heart: to blaspheme against the Holy Spirit is to refuse God the glory of His mercy.