Is drunkenness acceptable in certain circumstances?

  • Thread starter Thread starter EphelDuath
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

EphelDuath

Guest
Regarding the marriage at Cana, where Christ transformed water into wine:
John 2:7-11
*Jesus said to them, ‘Fill the jars with water.’ And they filled them up to the brim. He said to them, ‘Now draw some out, and take it to the chief steward.’ So they took it. When the steward tasted the water that had become wine, and did not know where it came from (though the servants who had drawn the water knew), the steward called the bridegroom and said to him, ‘Everyone serves the good wine first, and then the inferior wine after the guests have become drunk. But you have kept the good wine until now.’ Jesus did this, the first of his signs, in Cana of Galilee, and revealed his glory; and his disciples believed in him. *
Click to expand...
Seems as if the Lord was alright with the wedding guests becoming intoxicated. Can somebody clarify, or am I misunderstanding this passage?
 
Maybe it’s not the clearest translation. Douay Rheims has:

7 Jesus saith to them: Fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them up to the brim. 8 And Jesus saith to them: Draw out now, and carry to the chief steward of the feast. And they carried it. 9 And when the chief steward had tasted the water made wine, and knew not whence it was, but the waiters knew who had drawn the water; the chief steward calleth the bridegroom, 10 And saith to him: Every man at first setteth forth good wine, and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse. But thou hast kept the good wine until now.

Big difference.

The way I had always read it was that at weddings, one served the ‘best’ first. When everyone had enjoyed a glass or two (‘well drunk’, that is, imbibed but not to excess), the ‘Ripple’ was brought out. . .both to discourage drinking to excess (if one has appreciated good wine, then gets offered rotgut, one would likely stop drinking) or, if somebody was determined to get sloshed, he wouldn’t do so with $100 a glass Bordeux.

NOT that Jesus was encouraging drinking to excess.

It’s more a commentary on the quality of the wine (made from WATER) that Jesus gave.

This was a miracle. Possibly some people did sip the water made wine, but they were so busy gossiping about it “This was made from WATER! – Shut up! --No really–” that they probably didn’t drink all that much due to the talking. And probably some people were AFRAID of it and stopped drinking altogether.

Bottom line was the focus on the miraculous nature of the wedding gift and its quality. . .not on, “Man, everybody at the wedding was able to get sloshed with all this extra wine.”
 
I thought this passage was about taking advantage of someone who was not in their right mind. Like the weights and measures verses.
This passage in no way made me think Jesus was condoning drunken behavior.
I don’t see that in the passage at all. Nor could Jesus participate in a sin according to catholics. So it is impossible to take the passage in a way that would make Jesus be responsible for another person’s sin I think, if you are a catholic.
 
The Greek word is μεθυσθωσιν, which means “looped.”

I don’t think the Lord minds if people get happy at a wedding party.

This is NOT to approve of drunkedness as a habit.
 
bpbasilphx said:
The Greek word is μεθυσθωσιν, which means “looped.”

I don’t think the Lord minds if people get happy at a wedding party.

This is NOT to approve of drunkedness as a habit.
Click to expand...
μεθυσθωσιν = "methusthōsin"…yeah, just try to say that word when you’re looped…

Must be an ancient Greek sobriety test in itself…😃
 
this passage just means they drank something good that was of great quality and it didnt approve of being an alcoholic or a drunk peniless type person or whatever it was just saying. its ok to have a good time once in a while as long as you dont mess it up
 
Ghoti said:
μεθυσθωσιν = "methusthōsin"…yeah, just try to say that word when you’re looped…

Must be an ancient Greek sobriety test in itself…😃
Click to expand...
Doesn’t that refer to that older than dirt guy that had a name starting with Methusa, something or other?

So maybe its not looped, but refering to dementia? Alzhiemers? People lived for a long time before the flood, and then after it was some kind of special thing to reach a certain age I think.
 
StrawberryJam said:
Doesn’t that refer to that older than dirt guy that had a name starting with Methusa, something or other?

So maybe its not looped, but refering to dementia? Alzhiemers? People lived for a long time before the flood, and then after it was some kind of special thing to reach a certain age I think.
Click to expand...
No connection.

“Methusalah” (various spellings) is a semitic name. The Greek word I quoted is realated to the word meaning “to get drunk”.

That’s why classical partygoers would bring their own goblets with an AMETHYST in the base: a-methoun–a protection against drunkedness.
 
The Catechism (1735) states “Imputability and responsibility for an action can be diminished or even nullified by ignorance,inadvertance,duress,fear,habit,inordinate attatchments,and other psycholigal or social factors.” In our present culture with it’s declining respect for life, long term mental/psychiatric institutions have all but disappeared in most states, leaving the mentally ill unsupervised and a danger to themselves or others. Sadly,a plurality of those who suffer from mental illness, especially schizophrenia, are also plagued by alcoholism and sometimes other substance abuse problems. Their already imbalanced brain chemistry becomes more imbalanced!!Anyone who has a family memeber or loved one who is plagued with schizophrenia can relate to what I am saying. In Michigan, you can have someone briefly hospitalized involuntarily if their behavior is dangerous to others or him/herself. After a short stay of 7 to 10 days, patient is released into community expected to follow a treatment plan. Some do, some don’t. When you see people talking to voices that are not there on the streets of our city, these delusional persons often self medicate with alcohol or drink in addition to taking anti-psychotic meds. Years ago, before deinsitutionlaization of psychotic persons due to closing mental insitutions, these persons would have received intensive long, term care with needed therapy. Today, many are on their own, on our streets, in our prisons, and sometimes in our homes or neighborhoods. Many die before reaching their senior years as they are not wanted and long-term mental care is non-existent.The drunkeness of such individuals is possibly more acceptable than that of persons of right mind who do not suffer from pschycotic disorders.
 
Several priests have told me that drunkenness becomes a mortal sin when it becomes a habit and when you purposely set out to get sloshed.
 
I came upon this passage during Eurcharistic Adoration last night.
Prov.20

[1] Wine is a mocker, strong drink a brawler;
and whoever is led astray by it is not wise.
Click to expand...
Being “unwise” is unacceptable in all cases.
 
Galatians 5:19-21
Now the works of the flesh are plain: fornication, impurity, licentiousness,
20 idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, anger, selfishness, dissension, party spirit,
21 envy, drunkenness, carousing, and the like. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

Scripture makes it plain, I think.
 
SHW said:
Galatians 5:19-21
Now the works of the flesh are plain: fornication, impurity, licentiousness,
20 idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, anger, selfishness, dissension, party spirit,
21 envy, drunkenness, carousing, and the like. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.

Scripture makes it plain, I think.
Click to expand...
"party spirit"? Are you talking about the guy with the lampshade on his head in the corner or the guy leading the fellow travelers in “The Internationale”?
 
Ghoti said:
"party spirit"? Are you talking about the guy with the lampshade on his head in the corner or the guy leading the fellow travelers in “The Internationale”?
Click to expand...
I looked up other translations, seems that I was closer on the mark with the second:

D-R, Young’s, Wyclif: sects
Jerusalem: disagreements
KJV, NKJV: heresies
NAS, NRSV: factions
ASV: parties
RSV: party spirit
Darby’s: schools of opinion
NLT: the feeling that everyone is wrong except those in your own little group

Vulgate: sectae
Greek: αιρεσεις, “heresies”

Varying degrees of emphasis, too, it seems to me. “schools of opinion” and “disagreements” seem rather watered-down.
 
God gave us alcohol for our enjoyment. It’s a great blessing. Just look at all the psalms praising wine! The way I see it, getting “trashed” - as in, your face is numb and you have trouble controlling your actions - is a mortal sin because you lose the ability to make moral decisions, or at least such ability is severely hampered, but there’s nothing wrong with drinking enough to “feel” it a bit - that’s what it’s there for! It opens us up, makes us more friendly, and helps to relax after a hard day’s work. I don’t see how there’s anything wrong with that.

Just my .02, I’m no priest so don’t take what I say too seriously.
 
John92 said:
God gave us alcohol for our enjoyment. It’s a great blessing. Just look at all the psalms praising wine! The way I see it, getting “trashed” - as in, your face is numb and you have trouble controlling your actions - is a mortal sin because you lose the ability to make moral decisions, or at least such ability is severely hampered, but there’s nothing wrong with drinking enough to “feel” it a bit - that’s what it’s there for! It opens us up, makes us more friendly, and helps to relax after a hard day’s work. I don’t see how there’s anything wrong with that.

Just my .02, I’m no priest so don’t take what I say too seriously.
Click to expand...
I think you nailed it there.
 
Seems to me that drunkeness is never acceptable (who likes being around it?); the real question is: is it sinful? People who freely choose to get wasted with alcohol or other drugs (many a college student on a Friday nite) are probably sinning. However, about 15% of the population suffers with a genetic, hereditary disease that makes them react differently to these substances in such a way that they become addicted. These would be your alcoholics/addicts, and they are sick, not sinners. They need treatment rather than punishment, intervention (often requiring tough love) rather than blaming. The science is overwhelmingly clear now about the disease concept of addiction.
But it doesn’t look like a disease, does it? The behavior is at best annoying, and often it appears quite sinful: lying, cheating, stealing, etc. Think of a teenager with Tourette’s Syndrome. Some have a symptoms that appear to be voluntary sinfulness, e.g. repeadtedly screaming the F word in church), but we don’t punish them or make them go to confession for it. We know from science that Tourette’s is a treatable brain disorder, and so is addiction.
I am a priest, and you can take me very seriously on this one…
 
fics said:
Seems to me that drunkeness is never acceptable (who likes being around it?); the real question is: is it sinful? People who freely choose to get wasted with alcohol or other drugs (many a college student on a Friday nite) are probably sinning. However, about 15% of the population suffers with a genetic, hereditary disease that makes them react differently to these substances in such a way that they become addicted. These would be your alcoholics/addicts, and they are sick, not sinners. They need treatment rather than punishment, intervention (often requiring tough love) rather than blaming. The science is overwhelmingly clear now about the disease concept of addiction.
But it doesn’t look like a disease, does it? The behavior is at best annoying, and often it appears quite sinful: lying, cheating, stealing, etc. Think of a teenager with Tourette’s Syndrome. Some have a symptoms that appear to be voluntary sinfulness, e.g. repeadtedly screaming the F word in church), but we don’t punish them or make them go to confession for it. We know from science that Tourette’s is a treatable brain disorder, and so is addiction.
I am a priest, and you can take me very seriously on this one…
Click to expand...
Hmm, well, I gotta say I don’t buy the whole “addiction is a disease - like cancer!” thing.

I can understand why people think it. I mean, it helps addicts get better if they detach themselves from the accountability of their actions and can think of it as a “neurological disorder.” I’m sure that sort of thinking helps people get clean. But I don’t really buy it. When you decide to pick up another bottle instead of dealing with withdrawal you are making a choice. You can’t choose cancer, you can’t choose cerebral palsy, but you do, to a certain extent, choose addiction. I’m not saying that it’s a “simple choice”, like choosing to go to the laundromat or something, but you can’t deny the existence of free-will in the matter.
 
Actually, I can deny the existence of free will in this matter. Addiction by definition is the loss of free will. It is complex in the neurochemistry, but one of the more recent discoveries is that addiction is not rooted in the part of the brain that thinks, makes choices, prays, etc., but rather in a non-thinking, only-care-about-survival part. It is hard to understand perhaps because you can choose to pick up a beer or not, but an alcoholic can’t, any more than a kid with Tourettes can choose. The science is quite clear: addiction is not LIKE a disease such as cancer or diabetes, it IS a disease.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top