Man and Sin by Piet Schoonenberg (1964) 1.5AD

Summary of text [comment] page 37

Venial and mortal sin are analogous.  They differ in intensity.

[One would think that, for mortal sin, the interpellation between the vertical nested forms of thinkdivine and thinkgroup stops.

It does not.  It cannot.  Even when the occlusion of thinkdivine by a sovereigninfra thinkpro-object appears complete, and the world seems to be swallowed in an inevitable doom, the guilt is palpable.

One would also think that, for saintly practices, the interpellation stops.

It does not.  It cannot.  The dispositions always are falling in love with some good, some partiality, that undermines impartiality.  Buddhism developed a symbolic order devoted to removing the veils of illusion.  But, as any devout Buddhist will tell you, few have ever removed the last partiality.

Then why do the Ideological Pervert and the Buddhist Saint both come across as totally intense?

To me, “the diminution of interpellation between the two primal vertical nested forms” resonates with the image of “intensity”.

Both venial and mortal sin diminish (or or exacerbate) the call of thinkdivine.  They are analogous in this way.  They differ in intensity.]