I overate during supper. Is it a mortal sin?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lancelot1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Lancelot1

Guest
This is my first question on this forum, so hi, by the way! I want to ask just what I stated in the topic: I was having supper and I decided to have a second helping because it tasted so good. A few minutes after eating I started to feel a little bit off, a bit full and I realized that I have eaten too much and that I may have commited gluttony. So, is what I have done a sin? And if so, is it a venial, or mortal sin?
 
We can’t sin by accident. You didn’t set out to eat a ton of food. You did what we all do sometimes. Your eyes were bigger than your stomach.

Be at peace.
-Fr ACEGC
 
That doesn’t make sense. What if OP replaced the word food with beer? Surely it’s a sin to get drunk. Surely If you don’t stop yourself in time perhaps if you drink too much too quickly you’ll get drunk and that’s a sin

I think eating too much is a sin. It’s not like people aren’t aware of how much they’re eating

Bokbok
 
Last edited:
There’s a moral difference between having a beer, then having another, then having another, and kinda losing track and getting a little loopy, and sitting down and planning on slamming a twelve pack to get wasted. The latter is intentional drunkenness, the former is maybe a little careless, but obviously not the same thing.

-Fr ACEGC
 
I see the difference. In that case I’ve never been intentionally drunk!

At any rate they’re both sinful. At some point it becomes wrong to be that careless with drink. The same applies to eating too much

Bokbok
 
That point is going to be different for different people too. If the average person ate five steaks, that might be excessive. If a weightlifter did, that wouldn’t. If a 5 foot tall 90 lb ballerina drank five beers, that might be a problem. If a 6’5" 300 lb offensive lineman did, it’s not as big a deal.

This is why we say every moral act has object, intention, and circumstances. It’s not just “you did a thing that broke the rules.”
 
The Summa is great and Aquinas was a genius and a saint, but I don’t think it’s helpful to just throw a book at people and say “here are all your answers.” If it were, we wouldn’t send people to seminary and teach them to apply principles to everyday lives.

-Fr ACEGC
 
I guess the point I’m making is that OP came here knowing he ate too much and you’re saying don’t worry about it. Idk if you can say that. Maybe he should. I think it’s best for him to talk to his priest

By the way father I mean no disrespect. But sometimes when people worry about being gluttonous they’re already overweight is all.

Bokbok
 
Last edited:
I’m not overweight and eating too much generally isn’t an issue for me. However, if you say that this might be a sin, if it is, would it be a venial, or a mortal sin? Because I’m starting to worry if I should go to the Communion tomorrow.

I have read the fragment from the Summa but I’m afraid of misinterpreting things.
 
Last edited:
That’s why I only threw the part which covered gluttony. 😂
 
Last edited:
I think the question becomes slightly ridiculous when you consider that the op specifically asked about _mortal_sin.

If you sit back and apply some common sense to the question and ask “would having an extra scoop of ice cream for dessert totally sever my relationship with God?” the whole thing becomes a bit silly.
 
I guess the point I’m making is that OP came here knowing he ate too much and you’re saying don’t worry about it. Idk if you can say that. Maybe he should. I think it’s best for him to talk to his priest
I’m following my formation and my training and applying some common sense to a question that shows some signs of having been asked by someone who might be scrupulous. So I’ll be the judge of what I can and can’t say in this matter.
By the way father I mean no disrespect. But sometimes when people worry about being gluttonous they’re already overweight is all.
But now you’re saying not to worry about it because people are overweight?
 
This is exactly my point. We really need to get past the idea that morality is a bunch of rules, and God is just going to whack us on a technicality. The framework of “mortal sin” really is there to help us avoid severing our relationship with God, not checking whether or not we’re still in the club.

But what do I know.
 
I don’t think drinking and eating are really that closely related. In the case of eating, it’s really hard to get to the point of gluttany in one single setting. The worst you are likely to do is consume too many calories, which can easily be “made right” by eating less at other meals. I suppose it’s theoretically possible for a person to go all “cookie monster” on other people and be sinful by taking food that should be rightfully shared with others, but it sees that’s pretty rare. True gluttony is more of a habitual sin, in which a person lets the seeking of food completely take importance over their health, charity toward others, and their relationship with God. This can just as easily happen by being overly fussy with food as with overeating.

Drinking is another animal. As others have pointed out, people do get drunk unintentionally, because they didn’t realize how strong a certain drink was. Many people may be “tipsy” but are able to control themselves and keep from risking or abusing themselves or others. Other people drink intentionally to get drunk and without a sense of responsibility toward being charitable to others and keeping others safe. I’ve never heard of someone eating too many tacos and going home and beating their wife. Or getting a second helping of pie and blacking out while driving their car.
 
I just so wish this type of thread was like the old CAF, a Priest answered and that was that.

Back in the days of the dinosaur when the Priest was allowed the respect of the final word…
 
I was using drinking as an analogy to talk about the moral difference between being careless with food and intentionally being gluttonous. And there is some similarity in terms of the neurochemistry of eating vs. drinking alcohol. When we take in sugar, our body wants more of it, and alcohol can generate the same response.

I understand what you’re saying about drunkenness, but the fact is that not everyone who drinks or who even drinks a lot gets violent or engages in risky behavior. But this was not really my point in bringing it up. I was using that as an example to talk about intentionality.
 
Gluttony isn’t necessarily food related. It can be wasting natural resources, over-indulging in anything really can be a form of gluttony.

But no it is not mortal at all because a mortal sin has three requirements and one is that you were in full knowledge of it being a grave sin, clearly you weren’t because you just asked this question. Even then, getting seconds is fine and normal. It only becomes questionable if you are directly taking away food from the starving after you are already full (in terms of strictly food)
 
I understand and I mostly agree that both can be done both intentionally and unintentionally. My point is that excessive drinking has an immediate effect that most people can more easily predict than over eating food. Whereas intentionally eating more than the recommended portion of lasagna on your birthday because it’s your favorite doesn’t necessarily rise to the level of even venial sin when it is done in the context of a moderate lifestyle. Going out and intentionally getting falling down drunk on your birthday, telling your sister in law that you’ve never liked her, and crashing your car into someone else’s livingroom does arise to the point of mortal sin.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top