Is smoking cigarettes a venial sin?

[TedDC]

Ah, well that’s a whole nother matter in itself. Given the human lung’s capacity to inhale smoke, I wouldn’t call it a misuse until it gets past the point of moderation.

Under that theory, then, masturbation clearly isn’t a misuse because it causes no bodily harm at all when done in moderation!

 

[EphelDuath]

Under that theory, then, masturbation clearly isn’t a misuse because it causes no bodily harm at all when done in moderation!

The harm done by sexual sin is not physical, but psychological. Animals engage in masturbation (and also murder and rape) but there is no evil done there because they are entirely impulsed by instinct.

 

[TedDC]

The harm done by sexual sin is not physical, but psychological. Animals engage in masturbation (and also murder and rape) but there is no evil done there because they are entirely impulsed by instinct.

And what would that harm be? Where is the evidence? What animals do is irrelevant to the topic.

 

[EphelDuath]

And what would that harm be? Where is the evidence?

If you would like a debate on this issue, it has been discussed about a thousand times in every section of the “Apologetics” forum.

 

[Moscati]

G.K. Chesterton has an interesting take on smoking in this piece:

fisheaters.com/onamericanmorals.html

He’s hilarious, as always. Of course his time was well ahead of the research that demonstrated a link between smoking and cancer.

I personally don’t think smoking is a sin–my fiance smokes a pipe every now and then, and we both enjoy hookah with friends. I can’t see how one could call smoking a sin without calling jelly donuts a sin. And, from an epidemiological standpoint, obesity is a much bigger health problem than smoking these days.

 

[twelvestars8]

St. Thomas a Kempis, in his “Imitation of Christ” stated; "Vanity of vanities and all is vanity, except to love God and serve Him alone… it is vanity to love what passes quickly and not to look ahead where eternal joy abides."

God gave us a lot of commandments, which we can find in the Scriptures. If we desire to follow these Commandments in order to be pleasing in the Eyes of God, then we have to first die to our lowly nature, to be detached from all earthly things, as these Commandments are from the Mouth of the Holy and are therefore holy and Divine. If we wish to follow these Commandments, we would have no room in our lives for these “little pleasures of the flesh” as obedience to the Will of the Almighty Father requires a lot of time, effort and would leave our physical bodies exhausted in order that our souls may be purified.

 

[DomusAurea]

St. Thomas a Kempis, in his “Imitation of Christ” stated; "Vanity of vanities and all is vanity, except to love God and serve Him alone… it is vanity to love what passes quickly and not to look ahead where eternal joy abides."

God gave us a lot of commandments, which we can find in the Scriptures. If we desire to follow these Commandments in order to be pleasing in the Eyes of God, then we have to first die to our lowly nature, to be detached from all earthly things, as these Commandments are from the Mouth of the Holy and are therefore holy and Divine. If we wish to follow these Commandments, we would have no room in our lives for these “little pleasures of the flesh” as obedience to the Will of the Almighty Father requires a lot of time, effort and would leave our physical bodies exhausted in order that our souls may be purified.

Getting rid of all our little everyday faults before I start following God? I’d never get to the following!

 

[twelvestars8]

Getting rid of all our little everyday faults before I start following God? I’d never get to the following!

Exactly. But we always have a choice, the Saints did it through abandoning themselves fully to God, the Hermits in the desert too.

The Little Flower, St. Therese of the Child Jesus said, "…I don’t count on my own merits since I have none, but I trust in Him who is Virtue and Holiness. God alone, content with my weak efforts, will raise me to Himself and make me a saint, clothing me in His infinite merits."

Blessed Teresa of Calcutta said also, "Holiness is not the luxury of a few but a simple duty for you and me so let us be holy as Our Father in Heaven is Holy. St. Thomas says, "Sanctity consists in nothing else but a firm resolve- the heroic act of a soul abandoning itself to God."

I don’t know if you want to be a saint or not, but if you’re a Catholic, then I guess you want to Let us all pray for our brothers and sisters, especially those whom God has given us. Let’s give satan one heck of a battle!

 

[James_Least]

The Scripture says that: “What so ever is not of Faith is sin.”

We seem to have trouble discerning what that might mean.

Our basic paradigm for a possible sinful act: What is wrong with it? Should it not be: What is right with it?

There is a price to pay for the physical abuse of the body in any amount.

Then there is the environmental issue: we all pollute the environment daily–every time we exhale–tobacco smoke or not. I smoked cigarettes for 25 years give or take a week or two. That is approximately 182,500 cigarettes, king size, some extra long, some short. I also smoked cigars, cigarillos, pipes and rabbit weed–however, no"whacky tobacky", which is O.K. in some places, if one has a permit from the Doctor.

Is this venial or mortal? What would the penance be? Does it matter?

God does not permit sin in His presence. That is why we be presently separated from our Creator. This dilemma has been resolved:

Jesus paid for it all–at Golgotha–once for all–The Just for the unjust.

What have we done with Jesus?

Where will we be in 100 years?

Peace,

James Least

 

[Shin]

Is this venial or mortal? What would the penance be? Does it matter?

Yes. Every sin is due a particular penance, and the weight of the penance must be paid before entrance into Heaven.

Christ in His mercy will not apply any forgiveness of the penance due while a person does not repent the sin, and moreover, will forgiven Hell in the sacrament of Confession, but not normally the complete penance due the sin – you have to put in some penance too, or have someone else do it for you. It’s only just and right. The price is always paid one way or another.

Either you pay it or someone else pays it. Justice is satisfied.

 

[James_Least]

What does “Jesus paid it all” mean?" He paid the price–the one we could not pay anyway. Without the shedding of blood, there is no remission of sin. Even if we died for our sin it would not meet the requirement of innocent blood. Not one of the human kind is innocent. We are all depraved and in the miry clay. Jesus paid the price to set us free.

What have we done with Jesus?

Peace,

James Least

 

[Monte_RCMS]

In line with the discussion of how does someone determine what is sinful and what is not sinful.

Are you all watching the Winter Olympics?

Are the snowboarding “gymastics” sinful?

A few years ago, no one did that stuff. Only crazy people.

Now it’s an Olympic sport.

Was snowboarding or the acrobatic skiing a sin twenty years ago, but it’s ok now?

Is smoking cigarettes dangerous?

Are cigarettes today different from cigarettes twenty years ago? Additives in the tobacco?

If you grow your own tobacco and dry and cure it and roll your own, is that better for you?

What if none of this stuff is sinful? Not at all.

No more than eating a Twinkie.

Some Federal government officials are talking about regulating fattening foods.

At what point did humans lose their free will and no longer have any responsibility for their own health maintenance and wellness?

 

[MikiBee]

My point was misusing a body part for something other than its intention. It seems that it is sinful to use certain body parts in a way that God did not intend them for use. But our lungs were meant for respiration, not inhaling toxic particulates intentionally.

Our digestive system is intended for eating food, so the cake/twinkie argument doesn’t hold water. If I intentionally ate poison… say rat poison… that would be akin to smoking a cigarette.

 

[stringbeanduck]

My point was misusing a body part for something other than its intention. It seems that it is sinful to use certain body parts in a way that God did not intend them for use. But our lungs were meant for respiration, not inhaling toxic particulates intentionally.

Our digestive system is intended for eating food, so the cake/twinkie argument doesn’t hold water. If I intentionally ate poison… say rat poison… that would be akin to smoking a cigarette.

You should know that everything is a poison. The poison is simply the dosage hence one reason why Temperance is important. Eating rat poison is akin cake if you’re gonna put it that way.

 

[TedDC]

Well, the Church doesn’t say smoking is a sin, so it is not. I think there are just a lot of people who wonder why it isn’t. I don’t believe addiction is a sin per se. I just wonder where the line is drawn. Most intelligent people know the dangers of cigarette smoke whether they admit to it or not, or whether they want to agree with it or not. The evidence is there. If you know something could be potentially life threatening, potentially addicting-- when does it become sinful when you partake of that?

Smokers will always argue that everything we do has the potential of danger… driving a car, living in the city, eating anything that’s not nutritious… etc. However, there’s nothing about a cigarette that is healthy no matter what the tobacco industry would like to sell you on that. Directly inhaling pollutants into your lungs really serves no purpose other than personal enjoyment. People get a buzz from smoking, or they calm down, or it’s just a habit. But again-- you are using a body part intended for sustaining your LIFE for your enjoyment. Not only that, but the activity is actually harmful! That doesn’t seem any different than a few other sins that are deemed mortal. In fact, it seems worse. Again, I wonder why the disparity? My guess is because there was probably a Pope or two that smoked.

I think you’re on the right track with that last thought. My theory is that the Church has tempered the unerring guidance of the Holy Spirit with some good old-fashioned cynical political judgment. Tobacco (and alcohol) use are well-established and socially accepted in the majority of Catholic cultures, so a prohibition would likely be met with widespread disobedience. And because smoking and drinking are often done in public or semi-public situations, or at least not in secret, much of the disobedience would be obvious to all, reflecting poorly on the Church’s image of authority over the faithful.

In contrast, it’s “safe” for the Church to prohibit certain sexual conduct (artificial contraception, masturbation, etc.), because those activities are generally conducted in private, and thus the Church can claim without much fear of contradiction that its members are adhering to the rules.

 

[TedDC]

You should know that everything is a poison. The poison is simply the dosage hence one reason why Temperance is important. Eating rat poison is akin cake if you’re gonna put it that way.

The poster’s point was that smoking is using a body part for a purpose that nature - and thus God - clearly didn’t intend.

 

[EphelDuath]

I think you’re on the right track with that last thought. My theory is that the Church has tempered the unerring guidance of the Holy Spirit with some good old-fashioned cynical political judgment. Tobacco (and alcohol) use are well-established and socially accepted in the majority of Catholic cultures, so a prohibition would likely be met with widespread disobedience. And because smoking and drinking are often done in public or semi-public situations, or at least not in secret, much of the disobedience would be obvious to all, reflecting poorly on the Church’s image of authority over the faithful.

In contrast, it’s “safe” for the Church to prohibit certain sexual conduct (artificial contraception, masturbation, etc.), because those activities are generally conducted in private, and thus the Church can claim without much fear of contradiction that its members are adhering to the rules.

Catholics are also told not to eat meat on Fridays of Lent, but that seems to be a rather public thing. Your theory is ridiculous and I’ve already explained to you why the Church teaching is at it is.

 

[TedDC]

Catholics are also told not to eat meat on Fridays of Lent, but that seems to be a rather public thing. Your theory is ridiculous and I’ve already explained to you why the Church teaching is at it is.

Actually no, you haven’t explained the teaching - you’ve just given your opinion:

There’s nothing inherently sinful in smoking. Yes, it’s unhealthy, but so is eating sweets or sitting down for long periods of time; they’re fine if done in moderation.

Now, smoking in front of somebody who does not want to inhale it is perhaps a sin, as it is impolite and causing harm to others.

And to address that point: eating and being inactive are natural, and in fact necessary, uses of the body, so moderation is an appropriate guide, but inhaling toxic smoke is not natural.

 

[EphelDuath]

And to address that point: eating and being inactive are natural, and in fact necessary, uses of the body, so moderation is an appropriate guide, but inhaling toxic smoke is not natural.

We don’t eat food because it’s natural. Otherwise we’d only eat fresh, raw foods.

 

[TedDC]

We don’t eat food because it’s natural. Otherwise we’d only eat fresh, raw foods.

Food - raw or prepared - is natural because it fulfills the body’s need for nutrition. Toxic smoke fulfills no bodily need; in fact, it interferes with the body’s normal functioning.