Is smoking a mortal sin?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mannyfit75
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Mannyfit75

Guest
Since smoking kills you slowly is it a mortal sin since it causes death by causing cancer?
 
Smoking in itself is not a sin.

The sin involved would have to do with a violation of the virtue of temperance. In other words, smoking too much or not enough (although the situation of not smoking enough is not common by any means), is a sin.
 
dylanschrader said:
Smoking in itself is not a sin.

The sin involved would have to do with a violation of the virtue of temperance. In other words, smoking too much or not enough (although the situation of not smoking enough is not common by any means), is a sin.
Click to expand...
Huh? Not smoking ENOUGH???:confused:
 
mommyof4 said:
Huh? Not smoking ENOUGH???:confused:
Click to expand...
Fr. Corapi says it is in one of his talks…sin against ‘thou shall not kill’, or something like that. I do know lots and lots of smoking priests, though!

You can smoke at my house, but you better be on fire! (saw that on a sign somewhere!)
 
mommyof4 said:
Huh? Not smoking ENOUGH???:confused:
Click to expand...
Yeah, it’s kind of a shock to hear.

The point is that a virtue is always the middle ground between two extremes. Thus, temperance is between doing too much of something and doing not enough of something. So, there has to exist a sin–even though we don’t have a name for it–which would entail not smoking enough.

In practice, most of us don’t need to smoke at all.

If you read, St. Thomas Aquinas’s writing about drunkenness, he makes the point that it would be a sin if someone were to abstain from alcohol to the point that it harmed nature.

See, for example, Summa Theologiae Question 150, Article 1, Reply to Objection 1

It’s a strange thought. 😃
 
My take, if I knowingly poison myself slowly to death then it is a sin.
If I knowingly damage my body, which is the image of God, the Body of Christ, the temple of the Holy Spirit, then it is a sin.
This body is not mine to destroy; I am only the custodian. God will settle my account when I meet Him.

There is direct correlation between smoking and lung cancer. There is no “moderation” aspect of smoking.
BTW, I smoked from 1985 to 2002.
Now I am free from its grip.

Tak
 
The Catechism only mentions tobacco use in #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.
Click to expand...
 
I take it that having a cigar once in a while wouldn’t then be considered a mortal sin?
 
Yeah, it’s important to note that “temperance” is certainly the mean between two extremes, but often, we don’t know how to interpret this.

For example, drinking arsenic. Whether you drink a lot or just a little, it doesn’t matter. Arsenic is not good for you. The mean is not “drinking a moderate amount of arsenic.” It’s drinking none at all.

Then again, perhaps there would be a case where one would have to take arsenic to be able to continue living (wow…). By not taking arsenic, then, one would be committing a sin.

I do believe smoking is along the same lines. By smoking, one is killing themselves, or at least raising, unnecessarily, the chances for contracting cancer.
 
Chickamauga said:
I take it that having a cigar once in a while wouldn’t then be considered a mortal sin?
Click to expand...
Yeah, see, this would be an acceptable use of tobacco… as I don’t think smoking one cigar every now and then dramatically raises the chances for cancer or other life-threatening conditions. unless of course, you count a very unhappy wife, then, it may be. 😉
 
Zahmir said:
Yeah, it’s important to note that “temperance” is certainly the mean between two extremes, but often, we don’t know how to interpret this.

For example, drinking arsenic. Whether you drink a lot or just a little, it doesn’t matter. Arsenic is not good for you. The mean is not “drinking a moderate amount of arsenic.” It’s drinking none at all.

Then again, perhaps there would be a case where one would have to take arsenic to be able to continue living (wow…). By not taking arsenic, then, one would be committing a sin.

I do believe smoking is along the same lines. By smoking, one is killing themselves, or at least raising, unnecessarily, the chances for contracting cancer.
Click to expand...
Yes. It comes down to the question of how much one can smoke while still being within the range of a temperate amount.
 
Excessive smoking is a grave sin.
The problem arises though that smokers will ask for a definition of excessive and if you can’t define if it is 5 cigarettes or 25 a day then they use that as a justification to continue smoking.
Frankly all smokers should come to their senses and quit. It not only damages their own health, but others and their clothes smell, their hair smells and its disgusting to be in the company of a smoker (I’m referring to the smoke and not that the people are bad people).
I know. I used to be a smoker but quit 30 years ago!
 
dylanschrader said:
The Catechism only mentions tobacco use in #2290:
Click to expand...
Quote:
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.
Click to expand...
I don’t get it. One cigarette is excess. The sooner tobacco is made illegal the better. Smokers will have a chance to recover their health and save a small fortune. And we non-smokers will be able to walk down the street without breathing in tobbacco’s toxic fumes.The Catechism needs updating.
 
lak611 said:
You may wish to check out this link. forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=89933&highlight=smoking
Click to expand...
Michelle A. also states this
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=24386
…Christians are called to do what is reasonably necessary to protect their health (cf. CCC 2288). If using a particular product has been proven to be a danger to health and a person disregards known health warnings and uses it anyway with sufficient knowledge and consent, it may be sinful for him to do so…
…In short, all that can really be said for certain is that those adults who are considering taking up smoking tobacco should educate themselves on the health risks associated with the practice and use their informed prudential judgment to make a decision that is in line with their obligation to protect their health. If their smoking may affect the health of others (e.g., family, unborn children, nearby non-smokers) that factor should also be carefully considered.
Click to expand...
Tak
 
dorothy_smith said:
I don’t get it. One cigarette is excess. The sooner tobacco is made illegal the better. Smokers will have a chance to recover their health and save a small fortune. And we non-smokers will be able to walk down the street without breathing in tobbacco’s toxic fumes.The Catechism needs updating.
Click to expand...
And let’s get rid of automobiles…trucks…ships…industrial plants…airplanes…paper mills… nuclear power plants and all that nasty stuff! Thanks for being the health police, because, ya know, I just love it when someone else decides what’s best for me!
I understand if you’re in a restaurant, store, or other enclosed environment that it’s wrong to put another person at risk for an activity you’ve chosen. I totally agree with that. Outside though? Who made the earth your private property?
 
dylanschrader said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by mommyof4
Huh? Not smoking ENOUGH???

Yeah, it’s kind of a shock to hear.

The point is that a virtue is always the middle ground between two extremes. Thus, temperance is between doing too much of something and doing not enough of something. So, there has to exist a sin–even though we don’t have a name for it–which would entail not smoking enough.
Click to expand...
I am not sure that applies uniformly. What about suicide? What is the morally temperate position for suicide? Do we have to kill ourselves just so? If we don’t kill ourselves quite enough, is that a sin?

Dan
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top