JoeFreedom
New member
Bingo. This is the answer. The Church has a precept that we cannot take something to purposefully lose our reason, for the sake of enjoyment. Thus it would logically conclude that if the substance in question is either not taken for enjoyment (such as in pain, and is therefore a secondary or unintentional consequence), OR, if such a person only consumes a limited amount to not lose full sense of reason. Otherwise alcohol must be included in the category of non-approved substances.
But I believe the Church’s stance on this had to do with the likelihood that the vast, vast majority of recreational users were just that, recreational users, implying they wanted to get high and lose reason.
The Church also puts a lot of weight on intent. If you are in pain, and have tried all available remedies, and are looking for relief, and your intent is to relieve pain, and you smoke or otherwise ingest some cannabis, that also plays a factor.
But I believe the Church’s stance on this had to do with the likelihood that the vast, vast majority of recreational users were just that, recreational users, implying they wanted to get high and lose reason.
The Church also puts a lot of weight on intent. If you are in pain, and have tried all available remedies, and are looking for relief, and your intent is to relieve pain, and you smoke or otherwise ingest some cannabis, that also plays a factor.
Last edited: