Am I alone in being afraid of driving a car?

[nobeerinheaven]

I am not suggesting that such activity is sinful for other people, just that it is sinful for me.

And this is the way in which you are not submitting to the Church. You are saying that their instructions about sin do not apply to you, or that they haven’t given you enough instruction about what is or is not sin. This is scrupulosity to an extreme.

Trust us. The “Catholic Answers” forum would not be so hostile to someone making a legitimate sacrifice for the sake of others - if it were a legitimate sacrifice that helped others (like, for instance, giving all your money away to a charity that helped alleviate global starvation). Your sacrifice seems motivated by an irrational fear of sin, which helps no one and actually hurts you by encouraging your scrupulosity.

 

[rpp]

And this is the way in which you are not submitting to the Church. You are saying that their instructions about sin do not apply to you, or that they haven’t given you enough instruction about what is or is not sin. This is scrupulosity to an extreme.

Trust us. The “Catholic Answers” forum would not be so hostile to someone making a legitimate sacrifice for the sake of others - if it were a legitimate sacrifice that helped others (like, for instance, giving all your money away to a charity that helped alleviate global starvation). Your sacrifice seems motivated by an irrational fear of sin, which helps no one and actually hurts you by encouraging your scrupulosity.

I have got to agree with NoBeer here.

The people who have posted on this thread (with the exception of me) are some of the most charitable members and solid Catholics on this forum. Their observations carry weight with me. They should with you as well.

 

[rpp]

That’s not true. Although some action are intrinsically evil, most are not. In deciding whether an action was sinful or not, one must consider a person’s intentions, state of mind, possible ignorance, etc. For example, drinking alcohol is not sinful for most people, but to a struggling alcoholic it would be deliberatly placing one’s self into occasion of sin. If someone knew they were a terrible driver, it may be a sin for them to drive in a public area (deliberately placing others in danger) until they improve their driving skills.

Do not confuse an occasion of sin with actual sin. In your example with alcohol, it may be fine for me to have a drink, but unwise for an alcoholic. It would not be sinful for an alcoholic to have a drink, but it is, as you say, an occasion of sin. It would only be a sin if the alcoholic would over-indulge. But then, being an alcoholic and having limited control over the disease, there may be some degree of mitigation. But only God can know to what extent. On the other hand, if the alcoholic somehow managed not to get drunk (not have another drink), then no sin would have been committed.

As I said, if it is a sin for you, it is a sin for me. If it is not a sin for me, it cannot be a sin for you. God’s ;aw applies equally to everyone. We cannot pick and choose what is and is not sin, even if our choice is more restrictive than the Church’s.

 

[Kevin42]

I think it would be good of us to remind the original poster at this point that we are certainly not trying to trivialize, minimize, or criticize what they have said thus far or them as a person.

It does seem to be the consensus though that this is scrupulosity combined with a phobia of driving (perhaps caused by the deaths she has seen from car crashes). I would ask the original poster to please understand what we are saying, and to perhaps take it into consideration that they may be wrong. Peace and God Bless!

 

[Caesar517]

Do not confuse an occasion of sin with actual sin. In your example with alcohol, it may be fine for me to have a drink, but unwise for an alcoholic. It would not be sinful for an alcoholic to have a drink, but it is, as you say, an occasion of sin. It would only be a sin if the alcoholic would over-indulge. But then, being an alcoholic and having limited control over the disease, there may be some degree of mitigation. But only God can know to what extent. On the other hand, if the alcoholic somehow managed not to get drunk (not have another drink), then no sin would have been committed.

Occasion of sin is not a sin itself, but deliberately placing yourself in occasion of sin can be a sin. Obviously, God’s will is that we avoid sin. Purposely making youself weaker to sin is contrary to His will.

As I said, if it is a sin for you, it is a sin for me. If it is not a sin for me, it cannot be a sin for you.

What do you say about invincible ignorance?

 

[rpp]

Occasion of sin is not a sin itself, but deliberately placing yourself in occasion of sin can be a sin. Obviously, God’s will is that we avoid sin. Purposely making youself weaker to sin is contrary to His will.

What do you say about invincible ignorance?

This is getting a bit off topic, but I do think invincible ignorance enters into the issues on this thread.

You have still not shown how something can be sinful for one person and not sinful for another (ignorance aside). The occasion of sin, even if one intentionally places oneself in it, is not sinful. The intent to commit a sin is sinful, but not seeking an occasion of sin.

 

[Caesar517]

You have still not shown how something can be sinful for one person and not sinful for another (ignorance aside).

Why set ignorance aside? All I was trying to say was that sometimes an action is sinful for one person and not another. Invincible ignorance shows that enough to prove my original point.

Nevertheless, this is getting somewhat off topic. I think the OP’s question has been sufficiently answered. I take my leave. :coffeeread:

 

[Ghoti]

That’s not true. Although some action are intrinsically evil, most are not. In deciding whether an action was sinful or not, one must consider a person’s intentions, state of mind, possible ignorance, etc. For example, drinking alcohol is not sinful for most people, but to a struggling alcoholic it would be deliberatly placing one’s self into occasion of sin. ** If someone knew they were a terrible driver, it may** be a sin for them to drive in a public area (deliberately placing others in danger) until they improve their driving skills.

That’d be me…

 

[Kathrin]

Hello Maearl,

I can relate a little bit to your situation, especially the difficulty of seeing seen as “mentally ill”.

I am somebody who does suffer from scrupulosity, and there are certain areas where I know my thoughts have a tnedency to become obsessive if I am not careful.
However, there are other things that I do that I WANT to do. And then it is difficult to explain to other people that no, I do NOT think this is also “just a obsession/compulsion”.

I have some maybe extreme (in other people’s eyes) points of view too,t hat I want to have!

Of course I cannot say for sure sometimes myself if something is just scrupulosity or if it is “real”, if this is who I want to be, think I am called to be. But usually there is a certain anxiety to scuples that I can tell from other, healthier, ways of thinking. I hope so anyway!

Probably only you yourself know if this driving thing comes froms crupulosity, or if this is something you WANT to commit yourself to.
I think the two things would feel quite different.

Kathrin

 

[royal_archer]

… I am completely serious with my stance on this issue, and I was hoping for some advice.

Thanks, and God Bless!

I am going to have to disagree with most of the posters here and support your judgement because:

You are responsible for ensuring you do not harm others. If you feel that your driving would cause a risk that outweighs the bennefits then you are right to not drive. Any activity where the risk outweighs the bennefit is recklessness. I would challenge posters here to defend the concept of reckless activity as being proper.

Reading your post, the term phobia crossed my mind. But I understand that a phobia is an unreasonable fear that negatively impacts your life. (doctors please chime in). If you are concerned about your driving to the point of posting here then I would worry that your fear may negatively impact your driving. Your fear may also be related to a perceived ability. It also sounds like you have some work arounds that seem to be working well for you. It seems like you are making a reasonable decision to balance risks vs bennefits and at worse are erroring on the side of caution. I see nothing wrong with this unless it causes significant issues.

I agree with the advice to get some training and experience driving as this would tend to change the formula and reduce the risk. If there is a chance this is a phobia, you should seek advice on working through it. Driving is a valuable skill to have and you would be better off getting experience under normal driving conditions than have to drive in an emergency with less experience.

 

[whatevergirl]

Your responses do not surprise me. I appreciate all of your concerns, but I myself am somewhat concerned at how society reacts to people who take up positions similar to mine. Why is it that every time someone tries to make sacrifices for the sake of others, they are treated as mentally ill?

As Mother Teresa once said, “It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you may live as you wish.”

Likewise, I feel that for me to live as I wish, thereby putting others in harm’s way, would be a great poverty. I really am a good driver (I have never gotten a ticket or into an accident), I am just terrified I might be in an automobile accident and kill someone, regardless if I was at fault or not.
Please try to understand that this is stance is not a unique phenomenon: some Christians refuse to drink alcohol, gamble, have low personal hygiene, criticize others, eat more than their fair share, pollute, read certain books, watch certain movies, or buy certain products. These things are not done because they feel they are superior to others or are closer to God, they simply wish to live a life that does not inflict harm upon others, even indirectly.

I am not trying to convert anyone to think the way I do, and I do not make my decisions so that I might draw attention to myself. I just thought that there might be others who feel the way that I do. In case anyone thinks that the Catholic Church has no stance on issues like these, then you need to read this article.

You don’t have to drive, if you don’t choose to. My son, who is 15 yrs old, is not chomping at the bit to get his license either. My daughter’s lunch aid died a few months ago in a car wreck, and my son had a friend on his football team, whose mom died when she was on her way to get him from practice…so, you are not wrong to want to feel cautious. I will offer you this though–there is a distinction however, between ***being cautious and living in fear ***of something. Be careful to not allow your fears to paralyze you to move forward. Yes, people get killed in car accidents daily, but there are also people who get killed from a variety of other ways. I don’t know if there is a big enough bubble for us all! Jesus came so we wouldn’t have to be afraid anymore, as a matter of fact…Jesus telling His followers to not be afraid was the one thing recorded the most times in the Bible.

I would try to work through your fears, and give it some time. But, many people choose to not drive for a variety of reasons–I just wouldn’t let fear be the reason you choose not to.

God bless!

 

[Writer]

Unless you are under a special vow, such as what a priest or religious would enter into, an activity that is not sinful for me cannot be sinful for you. God’s law is not relative. It cannot be okay for me to do something and not okay for you, or vice-versa. This is pure relativism, only reversed to make it more restrictive on you. You may as well say that it is okay for me to be unchaste and not for you. That would also be incorrect.

When you say these things, you are not submitting yourself to the teaching of the Church.

Many of the things you named above are not inherently sinful acts, for example, selling guns. The Church states that Capital Punishment is permissible. We are not required to use artificial means to stay alive, (feeding tubes are not artificial, but life-support, e.g. a respirator, is).

Guns have many non-sinful and legitimate uses. Consuming alcohol or smoking cigarettes are note considered sinful. We are not obliged to donate blood nor are we obliged to be political activists.

If you want to follow these things that is up to you. When you clim they are sinful, that is not correct.

You are certainly overly scrupulous at best.

I wanted to take a couple moments to comment on this post. A good starting point to explore your understanding of sin would be Romans 14:21. If something makes our brother stumble, we are called upon to avoid the action. So, an action which might be in and of itself a neutral act, can be transformed into a sin because of the situation–i.e. if it were to make a brother stumble. It is also important to note that there are potential situations where a person’s act could be considered subjectively a sin, but lack of the person’s ability to discern good from evil could make the act (subjectively) not a sin. In other words, someone who lacks the knowledge or understanding to see a particular act as a sin may remove personal culpability (to a point, or entirely), but this doesn’t make the act itself less a sin in an objective view.

I’m short on time, or I could say this much more clearly. Others here have explained this much better than I have today. It’s not moral relativism, but understanding that free will must have knowledge of evil for something to be seen as a sin…

 

[Writer]

I wanted to take a couple moments to comment on this post. A good starting point to explore your understanding of sin would be Romans 14:21. If something makes our brother stumble, we are called upon to avoid the action. So, an action which might be in and of itself a neutral act, can be transformed into a sin because of the situation–i.e. if it were to make a brother stumble. It is also important to note that there are potential situations where a person’s act could be considered objectively a sin, but lack of the person’s ability to discern good from evil could make the act (subjectively) not a sin. In other words, someone who lacks the knowledge or understanding to see a particular act as a sin may remove personal culpability (to a point, or entirely), but this doesn’t make the act itself less a sin in an objective view.

I’m short on time, or I could say this much more clearly. Others here have explained this much better than I have today. It’s not moral relativism, but understanding that free will must have knowledge of evil for something to be seen as a sin…

Typo corrected above (in bold).

Examples of situations where we should avoid making our brother stumble aren’t hard to imagine. In my case, I was raised in what could be characterized as a “fundamentalist” Wesleyan church where movies and drinking alcohol were forbidden. As a protestant minister, my grandfather was (and is) keenly aware of the potential of his actions having a negative or confusing impact on members of the congregation. To this end, he would not even venture to purchase cooking wine and would certainly never consider going to a movie. Especially with regards to things like movies or dancing, those behaviors were viewed so strongly in the negative by that church that, had he done them, it likely would have been a sin for him. What might be a sin for him, though, would not be a sin for those of us who hold different religious views and understandings.

This is not relativism, but simply an acknoledgement that our views do influence our honest and conscience-informed decisions. After all, God alone knows our hearts. Of course, if our conscience is so wounded that we see good as evil and evil as good, then we’re marching merrily down the road of moral relativism…or worse. Sorry for the digression, but that post opened a can of worms!

 

[joeysk8er98]

I share the same anxiety of driving a car as you do. However, I have learned to overcome it in many ways. I live in a small town so I have no trouble driving at all. I do however, have a lot of trouble driving to big cities. I am very afraid of driving on freeways and busy streets in big cities such as Albuquerque, NM. The thing is, I learn to deal with it and I put myself in positions to overcome it.

I have talked to my counselor about my fears of driving. What he has done was suggested taking a weekend trip to a nearby big city.(of course this was before gas prices started going up) Another method that my counselor used was called EMDR. I forgot what it stands for, but what he does is, he has me imagine my fearful thoughts and he moves his finger back and forth and has me follow it with my eyes. This has been extremely helpful for me.

The one thing that has helped me the most when it came to driving in big cities was that I always had my rosary in my pocket. So far by the grace of God, I have been able to drive in big cities without getting too nervous. I am still afraid of driving in big cities, but I manage to make the trips when absolutely necessary.

Anyways, I hope this helps. God Bless