Is saying "Oh my Gosh/Goodness" blasphemy?

[Elizabeth3]

According to this online moral theology manual, which has several Nihil obstat & Imprimaturs by Germain Grisez and is a trusted source as far as I can tell, it says in question 4 part c

c) The casual, irreverent use of God’s name is not blasphemy. The casual use of divine names and the names of saints or holy things to express negative feelings, without hostility toward God, bears an outward similarity to blasphemy. But when such expressions are used (as they commonly are in some social and cultural situations) without any thought of dishonor to God or any intent to detract from his goodness, they are profanity rather than blasphemy, and are venial sins of irreverence. Insofar as it is irreverent, however, profanity in speech should not be taken lightly.

In itself, profanity is more serious than thoughtless cursing of other persons without serious intent (Go to hell!), for such cursing is not irreverent toward God but only disrespectful toward a created person. And both profanity and thoughtless cursing are more serious in themselves than the mere use of vulgar language, which is sinful only inasmuch as it needlessly annoys and distresses others.

Here’s the link

http://www.twotlj.org/G-2-1-K.html

 

[GG_Gecko]

Oh, so it’s alright to say “oh my goodness/Gosh”, then? If so, awesome!

 

[Elizabeth3]

Yes. It appears so. There is no ill intent towards God.

 

[GG_Gecko]

Tysm for the answer, friend! <3

 

[exnihilo]

I don’t think that follows. What you cited only addresses the words themselves. It doesn’t address minced oaths.

 

[ShowersofRoses]

If uttering God’s name thoughtlessly is only irreverent profanity, and venial at best, than logically, saying minced oaths, or nonsense words designed to avoid profanity, is obviously not a sin at all. They are designed to not cause discomfort in those around us.

I think the only people they offend are those with very strict rules about acceptable language. The whole debate reminds me about eating meats offered to idols and not offending the weaker brother.

 

[exnihilo]

If uttering God’s name thoughtlessly is only irreverent profanity, and venial at best, than logically, saying minced oaths, or nonsense words designed to avoid profanity, is obviously not a sin at all. They are designed to not cause discomfort in those around us.

Uttering God’s name thoughtlessly is sinful. Our guilt is a separate issue. We should strive to eliminate all sin, even venial.

Minced oaths are designed to evoke the same idea as the profanity they replace. That is precisely why they are so similar. Why would anyone chose ‘oh my Gosh’. It is precisely because it is like ‘oh my God’. Otherwise they could say ‘cheeseburger’ or any other word.

Also what about using foreign languages? Would saying whatever ‘oh my God’ is in Spanish be OK if I’m an English speaker? It isn’t saying the exact words but choosing similar words that evoke the same idea.

 

[AlbertDerGrosse]

If it’s OK to use God’s name or his title “God” if we’re truly intending to address him in a moment of surprise, or pain, etc. (i.e. OK only if we’re not using in vainly), wouldn’t blasphemy similarly only be imputed to those who use minced oaths with the intention of using them to cover a blasphemous phrase? If a person is unaware of the etymology of a minced oath I’d think it ceases to be a minced oath. Even more so when large segments of the speaking public do such that it’s no longer common knowledge.

Honestly, before this thread if you were to tell me “Jiminy Cricket!” was blasphemous I’d think you were making some joke about Disney having a cult following or being a religion in itself. If I’ve ever said it it was likely for deliberate dork effect, not to cover up any blasphemy.

BTW. Should one, in the future, remove one’s hat and bless His Holy Name the next time an 80 year old says “Jiminy Cricket!”? Asking for a friend.


Sit nomen Domini benedictum. Ex hoc nunc et usque in saeculum.

 

[ShowersofRoses]

If someone says Jesus Christ in anger, it literally hurts my heart. I have a physical pang of discomfort. If that person says “Jiminy Cricket!” or good grief, or golly gosh, or “for goodness sake”, my mind does not immediately think of God or Jesus and how they are being blasphemed. Those words cause no heartache.

The words are “similar” but not the same and cause no one any distress, except those with particular scruples in this regard. I’m sure that the closer to we come to perfect holiness, the less any of these words would come out of our mouths. But for now, pointing out such venial sins as these to people trying to avoid profanity seems unprofitable.

 

[Elizabeth3]

I think it’s fine for this reason. Even if gosh or geez originated as a way to mince the original words, the cultural usage is so far removed from that that the words are really nonsensical in meaning, most people have never heard of a minced oath, and even when people conscienciously are using it to avoid saying God or Jesus, they aren’t making the connection that the “nonsensical” word has any connection at all with the original. I never knew that until now.

Does that fact that one becomes aware of the history means now it’s a sin for them? I don’t think so. If it’s still being used in current cultural usage, knowledge of the history of how a nonsensical word came about doesn’t change your intent in using it.

 

[exnihilo]

I have no doubt most people have never given this any thought. So in the consideration of personal guilt I’d imagine most people aren’t intending to be profane or utter a profane substitute.

I think ‘oh my gosh’, ‘gosh darn it’, and ‘heck’ are pretty obvious. What is also obvious is that people will go to great lengths to be profane without being profane. Jiminy Cricket is a great example. Those seem like nonsense words but were put together just to say Jesus Christ without actually saying it.

What is interesting is how many of these phrases people say turn out to be minced oaths. There is obviously some deep desire in people to profane.

I don’t know that the passage of time makes a minced oath not profane. In the case of Jiminy Cricket it isn’t a phrase you’d ever use except in substitute for Jesus Christ or in reference to the movie. Since the words have no other meaning I think time doesn’t change things.

 

[exnihilo]

I could make the same argument for the actual profanity. I grew up hearing ‘g d it’ and ‘Jesus Christ’ said in anger. I still hear it frequently. They weren’t said, so far as I know, to be profane. So should I just use those phrases in anger myself? Could I at least use them with people who themselves use it?

 

[Elizabeth3]

I could make the same argument for the actual profanity.

But that IS the actual profanity (not the same thing as a nonsensical word that doesn’t have the same cultural meaning) and even when people say it thoughtlessly, they usually know they shouldn’t have said it because it is actually God’s name not some nonsensical word. I’ve seen many people say it, realize what they said and utter an apology to God in that moment. Some people don’t but that’s between them and God.

 

[Mintaka]

Earlier in the thread, I already posted an excerpt from a 1930’s Catholic moral theology manual for laypeople. It said that minced oaths were not sinful. (It also said that vulgar expressions were not sinful, and that even most cursing did not rise to the level of an actual curse because they weren’t directed at someone or trying to land a specific curse.) It is actual profanity and abuse of the Lord’s name that is sinful.

Moreover, it’s Biblical to avoid sin by using minced oaths. Why do you think there are so many “may thus and so happen” -type comments in the Bible? Why is it okay to pronounce “Adonai” when everybody knows it’s standing in for “YHWH”?

And why was it okay to talk about pagan gods with a disrespectful name like Ba’alzebub, when everybody knew it was standing for a respectful name like Ba’alzebul?

If you guys really want me to go look through the Latin theology manuals from centuries past, I can do it. But it’s going to make the same point.

Chaucer’s abbess used minced oaths. The Bible uses minced oaths. I don’t think this is a recent or sinful development.

 

[AlbertDerGrosse]

I don’t know that the passage of time makes a minced oath not profane.

Not the passage of time but the change in usage/intention of the user. “G-D it”, “Jesus Christ!”, and the incredibly foul version by which people give our Lord a middle name starting with ‘F’ I’d imagine are just as old if not older but the clear intention to blaspheme is still there.

In the case of Jiminy Cricket it isn’t a phrase you’d ever use except in substitute for Jesus Christ or in reference to the movie.

Or when you’re attempting to show surprise in a deliberately dorky way, as I mentioned above.

Since the words have no other meaning I think time doesn’t change things.

They do in fact have other meanings as I’ve demonstrated. This is precisely why etymology is a thing: language is not static. It evolves based on usage. Descriptive not prescriptive, and all that.

 

[Mintaka]

Okay, I’m fulfilling my threat! Everybody turn to Theologia Moralis by St. Alphonsus Liguori, Volume I, Tractatus II, Caput I.

There’s stuff about blasphemy, as well as malediction (cursing) and imprecation (vainly calling on God to smite people, as opposed to legitimate imprecatory prayer).

I’ll report back when I get there…

 

[exnihilo]

Earlier in the thread, I already posted an excerpt from a 1930’s Catholic moral theology manual for laypeople. It said that minced oaths were not sinful. (It also said that vulgar expressions were not sinful, and that even most cursing did not rise to the level of an actual curse because they weren’t directed at someone or trying to land a specific curse.) It is actual profanity and abuse of the Lord’s name that is sinful.

The citation doesn’t cover everything, like references to Jesus or ‘oh my gosh’. It also doesn’t actually approve of any of the minced oaths. It uses this to describe such language, ‘not exactly nice words to say‘ and ‘inelegant, unbecoming, vulgar expressions’.

Moreover, it’s Biblical to avoid sin by using minced oaths. Why do you think there are so many “may thus and so happen” -type comments in the Bible? Why is it okay to pronounce “Adonai” when everybody knows it’s standing in for “YHWH”?

That is a far point. The concept of God isn’t wrong. It was respect for God’s name.

They do in fact have other meanings as I’ve demonstrated. This is precisely why etymology is a thing: language is not static. It evolves based on usage. Descriptive not prescriptive, and all that.

What are those meanings? They are expressions of surprise or frustration. But why do we choose versions that are so similar to profanity? We could say ‘wow’ or ‘man’ or ‘cheeseburger’. But we seem to really like ‘oh my gosh’ or ‘darn it’. It is like we want to walk right up to the line but not officially cross it. Why is that?

 

[Mintaka]

Why do people abuse the Name?

Because when believers or ex-believers have strong feelings, they have an instinct to call upon the Name they care about. Like most sins, it’s has as much to do with misdirected good as with carelessness or evil.

A lot of disgruntled kids have an impulse to immediately blame their siblings or parents for anything bad that happens. Disgruntled adults blame God.

And yes, the gentleman wasn’t enthused about minced oaths. It was a big part of that time’s campaign against profanity to try and get people to get rid of non-prayer ejaculations.

But there’s a big difference between “declasse” and “sinful.” Nobody goes to Hell, or even Purgatory, for being declasse. (And some people end up in Hell because they want to be classy more than they want to be good.)

That said, there have been numerous studies showing that you can offset pain, even very strong pain, by giving your brain emotional release through yelling something. Yelling something nasty is more effective. The more shocking and uncharacteristic, the more effective.

Obviously there is a line between justified helpfulness and unjustified, ungrateful evil.

 

[Elizabeth3]

But why do we choose versions that are so similar to profanity? We could say ‘wow’ or ‘man’ or ‘cheeseburger’. But we seem to really like ‘oh my gosh’ or ‘darn it’. It is like we want to walk right up to the line but not officially cross it. Why is that?

Because most people aren’t consciously choosing with intent to “walk right up to the line.’ Most people’s intent is to avoid saying anything crude or harsh. For most people gosh or darn it is the equivalent of saying “wow” or " oh man.”

 

[Pup7]

Also what about using foreign languages? Would saying whatever ‘oh my God’ is in Spanish be OK if I’m an English speaker? It isn’t saying the exact words but choosing similar words that evoke the same idea.

“Dios mio” is “oh my God”. I seriously doubt every Hispanic/Spanish-speaking person on this earth is condemned for that.

Ex, you seriously need to move on from this. If you don’t want to use anything remotely resembling a minced oath, any euphemisms, whatever - don’t. But you’re not convincing anyone here that you’re right.