Drinking

[Matthias123]

I know there have been many threads on the subject of alcohol consumption. However I feel I need to bring this subject up once again to help me illuminate the grey area.

What is the grey area? Well church teaching tells us that drunkenness is a mortal sin. My first response to this statement is “define drunkenness”. Obviously intoxication will eventually lead to the point where there is no question about the state of mind of the individual. I am interested in defining when one “crosses the line” in order inform my own conscience.

Until recently I have always defended the idea that you become drunk when you have degraded your reasoning faculties to the point where it makes sinning likely. However I read a post by a Bro. Ignatius Mary a few days ago. (He is an American demonologist and occult expert.) I won’t go into why he was making the post because it is not relevant. He said that being tipsy (in the dictionary it means slightly intoxicated) is still intoxicated and is a mortal sin.

This seemed correct and I accepted it. However this lead me to wonder if the word buzzed also meant slightly intoxicated. If it did and I followed Bro. Ignatius’s logic it would also mean being buzzed would be a mortal sin. The definition for buzzed is “A state of pleasant intoxication, as from alcohol.” Until now I had always thought that is was not a sin to get buzzed as long as you didn’t compromise your reasoning faculties to the point where it makes you likely to sin.

I then looked up the dictionary meaning of intoxicated it is “affected by a substance that intoxicates; drunk; inebriated.”

So according to this dictionary definition having one beer would lead to intoxication because you are affected by a substance that intoxicates. Therefore could it be possible that the word intoxicated could not be the same as drunk in every context? Is it morally permissible to be in a state of pleasant intoxication as long as it doesn’t degrade your reasoning faculties to the point where sinning becomes likely?

 

[Matthias123]

post removed

 

[Tietjen]

I know there have been many threads on the subject of alcohol consumption. However I feel I need to bring this subject up once again to help me illuminate the grey area.

What is the grey area? Well church teaching tells us that drunkenness is a mortal sin. My first response to this statement is “define drunkenness”. Obviously intoxication will eventually lead to the point where there is no question about the state of mind of the individual. I am interested in defining when one “crosses the line” in order inform my own conscience.

Until recently I have always defended the idea that you become drunk when you have degraded your reasoning faculties to the point where it makes sinning likely. However I read a post by a Bro. Ignatius Mary a few days ago. (He is an American demonologist and occult expert.) I won’t go into why he was making the post because it is not relevant. He said that being tipsy (in the dictionary it means slightly intoxicated) is still intoxicated and is a mortal sin.

This seemed correct and I accepted it. However this lead me to wonder if the word buzzed also meant slightly intoxicated. If it did and I followed Bro. Ignatius’s logic it would also mean being buzzed would be a mortal sin. The definition for buzzed is “A state of pleasant intoxication, as from alcohol.” Until now I had always thought that is was not a sin to get buzzed as long as you didn’t compromise your reasoning faculties to the point where it makes you likely to sin.

I then looked up the dictionary meaning of intoxicated it is “affected by a substance that intoxicates; drunk; inebriated.”

So according to this dictionary definition having one beer would lead to intoxication because you are affected by a substance that intoxicates. Therefore could it be possible that the word intoxicated could not be the same as drunk in every context? Is it morally permissible to be in a state of pleasant intoxication as long as it doesn’t degrade your reasoning faculties to the point where sinning becomes likely?

As a general rule, I stop drinking when I first begin to notice the effect. For me, that maybe be a few drinks, because I am a very slow drinker, and a 6’5" 250+ lbs male.

 

[Matthias123]

Yeah but don’t we put alcohol in or beverages in order to feel the affect?

I am not putting down your rule, I am just thinking out loud.

 

[SeekerJen]

Yeah but don’t we put alcohol in or beverages in order to feel the affect?

I am not putting down your rule, I am just thinking out loud.

I think there’s a difference between the gentle relaxation that you might feel from one drink and the beginnings of disorientation that you feel after two or three. I remember reading even in books like Little Women, where the protagonists were all teetotalers, that wine was given to help people relax from a shock. It has a soothing effect that can be beneficial in moderate amounts.

Unfortunately the party culture among young people here and in other countries such as the UK teaches people to keep going past the relaxed point and on to sedation. It’s not hard to tell once you’re going close to the edge (unless you’re binging quickly on shots or similar, which is a stupid thing to do IMO), and I think if you keep going, it can be sinful. You’re putting yourself in danger of losing control and injuring yourself or others.

 

[stringbeanduck]

Yeah but don’t we put alcohol in or beverages in order to feel the affect?

I am not putting down your rule, I am just thinking out loud.

No not exactly. For most of us, it is for the pleasure of taste that is in the drink not the feeling. For example do you go on a wine tasting tour to get drunk? No! A good Margarita has 3 parts tequila, 2 parts triple sec, and 1 part lime juice. Most alcohol becomes present in beers during ferment. As you can see alcohol plays an important roll in the ways drink taste.

 

[stringbeanduck]

It has a soothing effect that can be beneficial in moderate amounts.

Red wine contain a good source of antioxidants, but if you’re like mother and gets tingly after a sip there are red wine extract pills(not a drug) that you can take. They way more potent than a glass of wine.

 

[steveandersen]

Yeah but don’t we put alcohol in or beverages in order to feel the affect?

I am not putting down your rule, I am just thinking out loud.

What is wrong with the affect?

All pleasures come from God.
(Think about how wonderful Creation is, yeast excrement provides us with a preservative, an analgesic, a digestive aid, a disinfectant, a sleep aid, and a simple pleasure. Oh, and you can make bread out of it too. Yeast has to be one of the most useful domesticated species.)

It is in the abuse or perversion of those pleasures where sin lies.

 

[Nick9]

A friend of mine suggests that you use the legal drink drive limit to determine when you have had enough (2 pints). This is the limit at which our faculties are sharp enough to control our vehicles and maybe it is also the point at which we begin to lose control of our actions in other areas.

I do occasionally have more than 2 pints but I often wish I hadn’t the day after.

 

[Newbie2]

A friend of mine suggests that you use the legal drink drive limit to determine when you have had enough (2 pints). This is the limit at which our faculties are sharp enough to control our vehicles and maybe it is also the point at which we begin to lose control of our actions in other areas.

I do occasionally have more than 2 pints but I often wish I hadn’t the day after.

Been there!

Only problem with that is that some people think they have their faculties about them when they don’t, and that there are those who could put away 2 quarts and not be affected in the least.

Best that each person knows his or her limits.

 

[SeekerJen]

Been there!

Only problem with that is that some people think they have their faculties about them when they don’t, and that there are those who could put away 2 quarts and not be affected in the least.

Best that each person knows his or her limits.

Exactly. I’m small (5’0", about 105 lbs). I’m done after 1 pint of good beer. I’m not drunk, but I can definitely feel it. Someone larger than me may take two or three pints to feel the same effect.

 

[Matthias123]

That you all for your replies. It appears I am being much too legalistic about this. I have been praying in front of blessed sacrament to help me inform my conscience on this. It is starting to make sense.

 

[Ruthie]

If you want a line to draw, I’d suggest looking at the research about how much booze it takes to make someone your size reach the legal limit for DUI in your state, plus how long it takes for someone of your size to eliminate it from their bloodstream. Then you can say, for example, OK I can have two 12-ounce beers, and then one more every two hours.

I think drawing the line at the legal limit for DUI makes sense, because I certainly believe that driving drunk is a sin.

I think tests have shown that most people are incapable of judging, while they are drinking, when they have become impaired. (I’m not sure of this - it’s a fairly dim memory.)

Ruthie

 

[rwoehmke]

I think tests have shown that most people are incapable of judging, while they are drinking, when they have become impaired. (I’m not sure of this - it’s a fairly dim memory.) Ruthie

I do remember, before I became an O’Douls fan, that at some point, while still being conscious, I sometimes decided to have a few more and became quite impaired as far as driving and talking sense. I was young and learned soon not to ignore it when my nose became numb. It seemed to be the first thing to go and thereafter served as a definite sign that enough was enough. Don’t try to decide your limit when you are three sheets in the wind and the fourth one flapping. That’s old lake sailor talk for being smashed.

 

[puzzleannie]

I
What is the grey area? Well church teaching tells us that drunkenness is a mortal sin. My first response to this statement is “define drunkenness”. ?

your state police will be happy to help you with this definition. if you can’t pass the breath test you are drunk and had better not be behind the wheel of a car–or in any other situation where you need all your faculties and good judgement.

In general if we cultivate an attitude toward mortal sin that leads us to investigate the gray area, and how far we can tread before stupidity becomes venial sin, or before venial sin becomes mortal sin, we are on very shaky spiritual ground and headed for disaster. A most unhealthy question based on a most unhealthy attitude toward sin.

 

[JonathanEdwards]

Well church teaching tells us that drunkenness is a mortal sin.

This is interesting since the local Catholic church where I used to live had a “beer garden” at their carnival every year and they didn’t seem to have any problem with people getting drunk.

I wonder if they would have considered it a sin if they weren’t making money off it.

 

[Ghoti]

I do remember, before I became an O’Douls fan, that at some point, while still being conscious, I sometimes decided to have a few more and became quite impaired as far as driving and talking sense. I was young and learned soon not to ignore it when my nose became numb. It seemed to be the first thing to go and thereafter served as a definite sign that enough was enough. Don’t try to decide your limit when you are three sheets in the wind and the fourth one flapping. That’s old lake sailor talk for being smashed.

I hear you. My booze-barometer is my cheeks – they get a sort-of “numb sensation” when I start to go over the line.

Now, generally speaking, the number of drinks I have in the run of a year you could count on one hand and still have enough fingers left over to play the piano. That being said, when I try a new drink, sometimes I don’t know my limit, as my body seems to handle different varieties of drink differently. I remember going to a comedy show once, and having hard lemonade(s). By the end of the show, I was feeling normal: alert, calm, no cheek-numbness, stone-cold sober; I was seriously underwhelmed by the effects of the drink. Then I tried to stand up, and it hit me like a ton of bricks.

 

[KingAlfred]

“What is the grey area?”

Excessive drinking. Don’t do it. It destroys lives. I’ve seen it up close and personal. I consider it excessive when one comes to depend on it, or has made it an important aspect of one’s life. That’s idolatry, IMHO. We must value God above anything else. Alcohol is an addictive, dangerous drug.

 

[peary1]

I know there have been many threads on the subject of alcohol consumption. However I feel I need to bring this subject up once again to help me illuminate the grey area.

What is the grey area? Well church teaching tells us that drunkenness is a mortal sin. My first response to this statement is “define drunkenness”. Obviously intoxication will eventually lead to the point where there is no question about the state of mind of the individual. I am interested in defining when one “crosses the line” in order inform my own conscience.

Until recently I have always defended the idea that you become drunk when you have degraded your reasoning faculties to the point where it makes sinning likely. However I read a post by a Bro. Ignatius Mary a few days ago. (He is an American demonologist and occult expert.) I won’t go into why he was making the post because it is not relevant. He said that being tipsy (in the dictionary it means slightly intoxicated) is still intoxicated and is a mortal sin.

This seemed correct and I accepted it. However this lead me to wonder if the word buzzed also meant slightly intoxicated. If it did and I followed Bro. Ignatius’s logic it would also mean being buzzed would be a mortal sin. The definition for buzzed is “A state of pleasant intoxication, as from alcohol.” Until now I had always thought that is was not a sin to get buzzed as long as you didn’t compromise your reasoning faculties to the point where it makes you likely to sin.

I then looked up the dictionary meaning of intoxicated it is “affected by a substance that intoxicates; drunk; inebriated.”

So according to this dictionary definition having one beer would lead to intoxication because you are affected by a substance that intoxicates. Therefore could it be possible that the word intoxicated could not be the same as drunk in every context? Is it morally permissible to be in a state of pleasant intoxication as long as it doesn’t degrade your reasoning faculties to the point where sinning becomes likely?

**I wonder if Brother Ignatius Mary considers Christ’s making wine at the wedding feast in Cana a mortal sin too, since it was Jesus Himself who provided the libations for the party. And nobody is a tea-totaller at a wedding reception - I don’t care in what era one belongs to!

The CCC (Catechism of the Catholic Church) states:

2290 The virtue of temperance disposes us to avoid every kind of excess: the abuse of food, alcohol, tobacco, or medicine. Those incur grave guilt who, by drunkenness or a love of speed, endanger their own and others’ safety on the road, at sea, or in the air.

The ‘buzz’-word here is abuse. In my opinion, being in a pleasant state of intoxication is not abuse and cannot be considered mortal sin.**

 

[CentralFLJames]

I only drink on weekends during social and recreational outings. I personally do not like to feel that I am not in control and will moderate myself if I feel like I am getting ahead of myself. One just needs to be self conscious of their condition and consciously spot check yourself now and then. If in conversation I notice that I am not communicating as lucidly or thinking as clearly as normal or catch myself smiling or laughing too much I stop or slow down and temporarily switch out to water or soda or something.

I think there is such a thing as being an experienced drinker and knowing experentially how to pace yourself without even being conscious of it. But I think the effects can change based on emotional state and of course body mass. When I was younger a shared bottle of wine with dinner (about 2 glasses each) was enough to get me significantly past “buzzed” and impaired to the point I did not feel comfortable. In those days I’d leave about half a glass of wine unfinished. But over the years either I am having longer dinners or because I am more tolerant to alcohol or just have more body mass 2 glasses of wine with dinner (over about 1-1.5 hrs) is very comfortable and not even really close to what I would call the “buzz” state. But at 3 glasses the buzz definately starts to manifest itself - especially if we have had pre-dinner cocktails.

Also, knowing the proofs of the beverages can help you know how to pace yourself. If I am with a group who wants to hang out for a few hours and listen to music at the outdoor tiki bar for example I’ll order less potent tropical drinks with single shots of rum (which is only 40 proof - about 20% alcohol). These can be drunk slowly for a fair amount of time without getting smashed. I can drink 4-5 of these over a few hours and not feel out of control at all. Cold sangria wine also works since its even lower alcohol but they are so sweet and fruity that one forgets they are an alcoholic beverage and its easy to over do it before its too late.

I guess I believe one should be experienced if they are going to drink and get to know your limits. That said, I have a brother in law who is predisposed to abuse alcohol and he knows it and is disciplined enough to avoid it. So, if one has any tendencies for substance abuse one should avoid settings where alcohol is going to be an issue or be disciplined enough to know your limits or avoid altogether.

James