I have to begin here with an honest piece of astronomy, because it changes the whole conversation. Sun opposite Mercury in a single person's natal chart is impossible. Not rare, not tricky to interpret — impossible, in the same way a square or a trine between the Sun and Mercury is impossible. This isn't my opinion and it isn't the line of one particular school. It's simply the geometry of the solar system.
Mercury is the planet closest to the Sun. From Earth we always see it near the daytime star, because its orbit fits entirely inside our own. The greatest angular distance Mercury can put between itself and the Sun, from our vantage point, is about 27 to 28 degrees. Astronomers call that the greatest elongation. To form an opposition you need 180 degrees. To form a square you need 90. To form a trine you need 120. Not one of them is available to the Sun–Mercury pair inside a single nativity. What is possible is the conjunction — the two together in one sign or close to it — a very rare semi-sextile right at the edge of elongation, and sometimes a sextile, and even that only in specific calculations, and not in every school.
So if someone, somewhere, tells you about a natal opposition between your Sun and your Mercury, it is almost certainly one of three things. The first: the software is running on faulty ephemerides or the wrong birth time. The second: a wide conjunction across a sign boundary is being passed off as an opposition — say, your Sun in the last degree of Pisces and your Mercury in the first degree of Aries. That is still a conjunction, technically less than five degrees apart. The third: a simple mix-up with another aspect or another planet.
What, then, does Mercury near your Sun actually show in the birth chart? It shows how you think with the 'I' you broadcast to the world. A Sun–Mercury conjunction is the baseline state of most people. Will and word travel together. You say what you are. If the gap between them is under 17 arc-minutes, astrologers call it Mercury cazimi — 'Mercury in the heart of the Sun' — and treat it as a rare marker of unusual mental clarity. If the two are in the same sign but not flush against each other, it is a calm conjunction, an even union of will and phrasing.
What do you do with this knowledge in practice? First, if you book a natal consultation and hear about a Sun–Mercury opposition, ask a follow-up question. A good astrologer will either own the error and recalculate, or explain what they actually meant — often a wide conjunction across a sign or an aspect to a different planet. Second, don't be alarmed if your own software once flashed the aspect at you. Check the birth time, check the time zone, and check whether the programme is quietly drawing a heliocentric chart instead of a geocentric one. In a heliocentric system Mercury genuinely can end up across from the Earth, but that is an entirely different kind of astrology, and ordinary natal-aspect readings don't apply to it.
This natal section has come out shorter than the other two, and not because there's nothing to say. It's because honesty matters more than length. I could invent a pretty interpretation of a non-existent aspect — the internet is awash with exactly those texts — but it would be poor work. If you're curious about how Mercury beside your Sun shapes your cast of mind, there's a separate page for their conjunction, where the reading is full and detailed. The real Sun–Mercury opposition lives in two other settings, synastry and transit, and the next two sections belong to them. Hold all of it lightly, as a way to understand patterns and to enjoy the symbolism, never as a forecast of what must happen.