Is smoking Marijuana sinful?

[pcg2]

If so, is it because it is illegal? Because from what I know, marijuana is no less healthy than smoking a cigarette or eating a big, greasy McDonlads hamburger!

 

[Milesius]

It is definitely sinful because it is illegal.

It is also sinful because it alters your mental state and is therefore sinful for the same reason drunkenness is sinful.

 

[JosephdeMaistre]

drunkenness is sinful.

Hmm, I often wonder about this one:

Psalm 103

[13] Thou waterest the hills from thy upper rooms: the earth shall be filled with the fruit of thy works: [14] Bringing forth grass for cattle, and herb for the service of men. That thou mayst bring bread out of the earth: [15] And that wine may cheer the heart of man. That he may make the face cheerful with oil: and that bread may strengthen man’s heart.

…

Certainly, Christ’s very first miracle was turning water into wine…after all of the wine had been consumed! I must wonder how sinful it really is to drink a little too much when Christ’s own miracle encourages a second round

I would argue that just laws ought to be obeyed, and I see nothing unjust about banning marijuana. But let’s not get carried away…

 

[Milesius]

You can drink without getting drunk, drunkenness is certainly sinful in fact it is a mortal sin and to die while drunk according to some theologians is to die almost guaranteed hell because you are in such a state where you are unable to reason that there is no chance of perfect contrition at the point of death.

St. Thomas covers drunkenness in the Summa Theologica.

As does St. Paul:

Let us walk honestly, as in the day: not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and impurities, not in contention and envy: [14] But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh in its concupiscences. Romans 13

 

[JosephdeMaistre]

You can drink without getting drunk, drunkenness is certainly sinful in fact it is a mortal sin and to die while drunk according to some theologians is to die almost guaranteed hell because you are in such a state where you are unable to reason that there is no chance of perfect contrition at the point of death.

St. Thomas covers drunkenness in the Summa Theologica.

As does St. Paul:

Let us walk honestly, as in the day: not in rioting and drunkenness, not in chambering and impurities, not in contention and envy: [14] But put ye on the Lord Jesus Christ, and make not provision for the flesh in its concupiscences. Romans 13

Of course, drunkenness is not a 0 or a 1 issue - one can be slowly on the road to drunkenness, but not yet be there. One cannot say that after 2 drinks, every man is drunk. Some men are drunk after 2, others are drunk after 10. Thomas says it is the point at which we lose our reason. When is that? It is individually-based.

So, drunkenness could be considered a sin, but only if we understand what drunkenness is. Is it blacking out? Is it losing control of one’s faculties entirely? Or is it being mildly buzzed? Do we lose our reason when we are mildly buzzed?

To better understand the issue, it is necessary to analyze the Gospel. Does Christ encourage excessive drinking by providing a wedding party more wine after it has consumed all of the wine? Was Christ assured that not a single individual in the wedding party had too much to drink? To give wine to a drunk after you know he is already drunk could also be considered a sin because you facilitate his sin, knowing full well his condition. And of course, Christ knew all things, so He would have known the condition of every man in the wedding party. But it is not clear that Christ makes that distinction, or takes that into account. He listens to the words of His Mother, and does this favor for her.

We also know that Christ was sinless, and so we know He did not sin by giving alcohol to those who had already imbibed at least one drink. So, we know two drinks are not sinful. And we also know that the quality of the wine that Christ gave them was stronger than the previous wine, because the wedding party notes that the master saves the good wine for the second round??!! These people drank one glass, then compared it to the second glass so they were able to distinguish the difference between the quality.

In short, Christ never sinned, and He never facilitated a sin. And so it is never a sin to drink two drinks, at the very least. And it is dubious to suggest that one can know how many drinks it really takes to cause a man to lose his reason, beyond reasonable, well-known limits, like 10.

Further, Psalms clearly tells us that wine gladdens the heart, which is why God made it. And so, if we drink wine to gladden the heart, but we do not approach the point of drunkenness, we are well within the limits God has provided for us.

The trick is understanding one’s limits.

 

[pcg2]

It is definitely sinful because it is illega

l.

So is making a turn across a double line, or going 55 in a 50 mph zone. Most (if not all) people would consider none of those things sinful. So I don’t understand the reasoning that just because something is illegal, it is automatically sinful.

Another objection - different things are illegal in different continents, countries, states, even cities! So if someone were to smoke pot in Amsterdam, would it all-of-a-sudden not be sinful just because there it is legal? Doesn’t make sense.

It is also sinful because it alters your mental state and is therefore sinful for the same reason drunkenness is sinful.

Now this to me seems like a better response. But how would you respond to someone who said that they could smoke just a little to the point where they felt good, but did not lose consciousness? This would be the equivalent of someone getting “buzzed” by drinking alcohol - which is not a sin.

 

[GodLovesTheSpek]

Yes. It’s unlawful in the USA. That’s only the beginning.

The Catechism explains fully here about following the laws: vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s1c2a2.htm#I

Then look at the Catechism 2291 here (and in the general area concerning the fifth commandment): vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a5.htm

It’s a lot more than a simple proposition of: “Why can’t I if it’s in my own home and not hurting anyone else”. Truthfully, everyone is hurt. If we want “hard evidence” take a look at the drug cartel wars on the Mexico/USA border and it’s not “just marijuana”. People are being tortured and murdered for this “harmless fun”. The pictures are not pretty.

If someone tries to glamorize it, look and show to the “friend” a picture of jumbled exploded, bloody heads on Mexico’s streets laying next to bullet riddled vehicles.

Party’s over.

 

[ThomasToo]

Yes. It’s unlawful in the USA. That’s only the beginning.

The Catechism explains fully here about following the laws: vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s1c2a2.htm#I

Then look at the Catechism 2291 here (and in the general area concerning the fifth commandment): vatican.va/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a5.htm

It’s a lot more than a simple proposition of: “Why can’t I if it’s in my own home and not hurting anyone else”. Truthfully, everyone is hurt. If we want “hard evidence” take a look at the drug cartel wars on the Mexico/USA border and it’s not “just marijuana”. People are being tortured and murdered for this “harmless fun”. The pictures are not pretty.

If someone tries to glamorize it, look and show to the “friend” a picture of jumbled exploded, bloody heads on Mexico’s streets laying next to bullet riddled vehicles.

Party’s over.

And if it were legal and therefore not tied to organized crime?

 

[NewsTheMan]

l.

So is making a turn across a double line, or going 55 in a 50 mph zone. Most (if not all) people would consider none of those things sinful. So I don’t understand the reasoning that just because something is illegal, it is automatically sinful.

Another objection - different things are illegal in different continents, countries, states, even cities! So if someone were to smoke pot in Amsterdam, would it all-of-a-sudden not be sinful just because there it is legal? Doesn’t make sense.

Now this to me seems like a better response. But how would you respond to someone who said that they could smoke just a little to the point where they felt good, but did not lose consciousness? This would be the equivalent of someone getting “buzzed” by drinking alcohol - which is not a sin.

Well said. Well said indeed. Exactly what I would have said. Thisis my biggest question. How can people be allowed to drink and feel good doing it, and yet I cannot smoke a bit of weed just enough to feel slight effects but not enough to get super stoned?? It is unfair and its bizarre.

 

[Urijah3]

It is definitely sinful because it is illegal.

It is also sinful because it alters your mental state and is therefore sinful for the same reason drunkenness is sinful.

"Caffeine stimulates the brain, elevates the mood and postpones fatigue. It also enhances performance at simple intellectual tasks, and at physical work that involves endurance, but not fine motor co-ordination. (Caffeine-caused tremor can reduce hand steadiness.) If you consume caffeine before bedtime, you will likely take longer to get to sleep, sleep for a shorter time and sleep less deeply.

Contrary to popular belief, drinking coffee will not help you to “sober up” if you’ve had too much alcohol. The caffeine will make you more alert, but your co-ordination and concentration will still be impaired.

Too much caffeine can give you a headache, upset your stomach, make you nervous and jittery and leave you unable to sleep. Some people feel these effects even with a very small amount. Larger doses of caffeine, especially when consumed by people who don’t usually take caffeine, can cause rapid heartbeat, convulsions and even delirium.

How long does the feeling last?

When taken in beverage form, caffeine begins to take effect within five minutes, and reaches its peak effect in about 30 minutes. It takes about four hours for half of a given dose of caffeine to be metabolized by the body. Normally, almost all ingested caffeine is metabolized, and there is no day-to-day accumulation of the drug in the body. "

camh.net/about_addiction_mental_health/drug_and_addiction_information/caffeine_dyk.html

Caffeine also Impairs your mental state but Ive never herd of it being a sin? I am probably just misinformed.

 

[Urijah3]

"cannabis is listed in the 1929-1930 Physicians’ Catalog of the Pharmaceutical and Biological Products of Parke, Davis & Company as an active ingredient in ten products for cough, colic, neuralgia, cholera mordus and other medical conditions, as well as a “narcotic, analgesic, and sedative.”
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_%28drug%29#Medical_use

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/44/Drug_bottle_containing_cannbis.jpg

I wonder what the Churches position on Cannabis was during the early 1900’s when you could get some cannabis extract for something as simple as a cough or if you were having trouble going to sleep at night?

 

[LilyM]

l.

So is making a turn across a double line, or going 55 in a 50 mph zone. Most (if not all) people would consider none of those things sinful. So I don’t understand the reasoning that just because something is illegal, it is automatically sinful.

Another objection - different things are illegal in different continents, countries, states, even cities! So if someone were to smoke pot in Amsterdam, would it all-of-a-sudden not be sinful just because there it is legal? Doesn’t make sense.

Of course it makes sense - it’s all about the duty to obey non-sinful directives of God-given authorities like legislatures. St Paul reminds us that we need to obey all lawful authority.

As an analogy - let’s say I’m a teenager, with a duty to obey all non-sinful directives of my parents, who are in authority over me. Let’s say they give me a curfew of 10pm. Let’s say I have a friend of the same age, whose parents give her a curfew of midnight.

The fact that her parents, who are lawful authorities over her but not over me, have a different curfew for her doesn’t change MY duty to obey MY parents, who ARE the lawful authorities placed over me by God. So I would be sinfully disobedient to stay out until 12 when they’ve set me a curfew of 10.

On the other hand, my friend is NOT required to adhere to MY curfew, because MY parents are, absent unusual circumstances such as her sleeping over at my house, not in any position of authority over her. So SHE doesn’t disobey, nor sin, by staying out until 12.

 

[Milesius]

Jut because people have lost their sense of sin and refuse to accept that speeding is sinful does not change the fact that it is, disobedience to those in authority is a sin unless they are commanding something contrary to a higher authority such as God, and the speeding laws are not.

 

[Milesius]

Of course, drunkenness is not a 0 or a 1 issue - one can be slowly on the road to drunkenness, but not yet be there. One cannot say that after 2 drinks, every man is drunk. Some men are drunk after 2, others are drunk after 10. Thomas says it is the point at which we lose our reason. When is that? It is individually-based.

So, drunkenness could be considered a sin, but only if we understand what drunkenness is. Is it blacking out? Is it losing control of one’s faculties entirely? Or is it being mildly buzzed? Do we lose our reason when we are mildly buzzed?

To better understand the issue, it is necessary to analyze the Gospel. Does Christ encourage excessive drinking by providing a wedding party more wine after it has consumed all of the wine? Was Christ assured that not a single individual in the wedding party had too much to drink? To give wine to a drunk after you know he is already drunk could also be considered a sin because you facilitate his sin, knowing full well his condition. And of course, Christ knew all things, so He would have known the condition of every man in the wedding party. But it is not clear that Christ makes that distinction, or takes that into account. He listens to the words of His Mother, and does this favor for her.

We also know that Christ was sinless, and so we know He did not sin by giving alcohol to those who had already imbibed at least one drink. So, we know two drinks are not sinful. And we also know that the quality of the wine that Christ gave them was stronger than the previous wine, because the wedding party notes that the master saves the good wine for the second round??!! These people drank one glass, then compared it to the second glass so they were able to distinguish the difference between the quality.

In short, Christ never sinned, and He never facilitated a sin. And so it is never a sin to drink two drinks, at the very least. And it is dubious to suggest that one can know how many drinks it really takes to cause a man to lose his reason, beyond reasonable, well-known limits, like 10.

Further, Psalms clearly tells us that wine gladdens the heart, which is why God made it. And so, if we drink wine to gladden the heart, but we do not approach the point of drunkenness, we are well within the limits God has provided for us.

The trick is understanding one’s limits.

You are making assumptions about Christ that are not supported by the texts, there is nothing scripture that tells us how much wine the people at the wedding drank.

Let me reiterate, driniking alcohol is not sinful getting drunk is sinful, however drinking excess alcohol even if you dont do it to the point of drunkeness would be gluttony, so with alcohol there are two possible ways to sin.

Now back to Marijuana, when you are stoned you do not have the use of your reason, hence getting stoned is a sin for the same reason getting drunk is a sin.

 

[bingbang]

Now back to Marijuana, when you are stoned you do not have the use of your reason, hence getting stoned is a sin for the same reason getting drunk is a sin.

I am going to guess that you have never smoked Marijuana before.

Anyway, there is no reason AT ALL why drinking a couple beers or a glass of scotch to relax should be any different than smoking a little bit of weed to relax. Just like alcohol, you can smoke a little bit of weed and only feel slight effects.

Other than the fact that it is illegal, there shouldn’t be an argument against it in small amounts. In fact it is undoubtedly safer than alcohol on both your body AND safer to others around you.

Weed is only sinful if you use it to excess. And to be honest if on a special occasion you get a good buzz going from weed or alcohol, I don’t really think that is sinful either (that isn’t based on church teaching or anything, just what is in my heart).

 

[Bob_Crowley]

If so, is it because it is illegal? Because from what I know, marijuana is no less healthy than smoking a cigarette or eating a big, greasy McDonlads hamburger!

I"m sure that heavy and prolonged use of marijuana can lead to mental illness. I work in a non-profit organisation where we put long term unemployed on for a period to encourage them back into the workforce.

We had one young bloke on the project who had a history of just that. The supervisor could give him a fairly basic instruction and a minute later he could not remember it. Yet he came from a family of fairly high achievers. Nor was there anything wrong with his IQ. But when he was on the dope, instructions went in one ear and out the other.

I also suspect it is a factor in some cases of schizophrenia.

Finally a lot of it is grown hydropnically these days. The chemicals they put into the water are then inhaled into the lungs and from there straight into the bloodstream and into the brain.

I haven’t got much time for the argument.

Secondly I remember a quote by a judge from some years back that while some people argued that “soft drugs” didn’t hurt, it was his experience that every single user of hard drugs started with “soft drugs”.

We don’t need it. I don’t mind a drink or two (although I drink very little), but the fact is that the legal drug ethyl alcohol does more damage than all the illegal drugs combined. We don’t need more legal drugs to do more damage still.

 

[StevenFrancis]

If so, is it because it is illegal? Because from what I know, marijuana is no less healthy than smoking a cigarette or eating a big, greasy McDonlads hamburger!

It may be to me, but not to you, or to you and not to me. God instilled a conscience. What does it tell you? Do you suppose that whether or not it is a health hazard, that it is a sensible means of keeping the temple of God clean, and keeping your soul open to prayer and contact from God? Do you tend to visit the sick more often, or give alms, or visit the blessed sacrament, or discuss pot with your grandma much when you’re high? Being fat, smoking, drinking, drugs, etc. if not used responsibly, and in thanks to the glory of God are sinful. Particularly if you think they are for you and your purposes after consulting with God through your conscience in prayer.

What is your treasure? That’s the question I must ask myself every day. When the answer comes back as anything but my eternal life with Jesus, then I need to pray and meditate on many parables.

Nobody here can tell you it is a sin. God tells you whether it is a sin. I’ve never known anybody, including myself, who didn’t smoke pot for effect. In order to get high. I’ve known many people who can drink 1 single small glass of wine with their dinner, or even a cognac afterward to enjoy the fruits of their labors and enjoy the good things God gave us. They can then put the alcohol down and go back about their life. There are people that way about cigars and such too. I have never been successful. I’m an alcoholic. So for my brother to drink is not a sin, but for me it is. The alcohol isn’t the sin. The way I use alcohol is a sin. Do you see?

Marijuana is not generally treated as a substance of moderation, and even if it was, it is illegal in most places, and so to use it is failing to be a good citizen, which we are called to be by Christ.

You be the judge of you.

Peace,

Steve

 

[bingbang]

I"m sure that heavy and prolonged use of marijuana can lead to mental illness. I work in a non-profit organisation where we put long term unemployed on for a period to encourage them back into the workforce.

We had one young bloke on the project who had a history of just that. The supervisor could give him a fairly basic instruction and a minute later he could not remember it. Yet he came from a family of fairly high achievers. Nor was there anything wrong with his IQ. But when he was on the dope, instructions went in one ear and out the other.

I also suspect it is a factor in some cases of schizophrenia.

Finally a lot of it is grown hydropnically these days. The chemicals they put into the water are then inhaled into the lungs and from there straight into the bloodstream and into the brain.

I haven’t got much time for the argument.

Secondly I remember a quote by a judge from some years back that while some people argued that “soft drugs” didn’t hurt, it was his experience that every single user of hard drugs started with “soft drugs”.

We don’t need it. I don’t mind a drink or two (although I drink very little), but the fact is that the legal drug ethyl alcohol does more damage than all the illegal drugs combined. We don’t need more legal drugs to do more damage still.

Read this article about schizophrenia and marijuana…it seems like weed doesn’t cause psychosis.

Anyway, weed as a gateway drug is ONLY a product of it being illegal. If weed were legal, it would be no more of a gateway drug than alcohol. If someone legally goes into a store and buys weed, they are unlikely to then seek out harder drugs illegally.

As for your forgetful friend…obviously he is going to forget things while he is high. How would a drunk person do at a job?

As for your theory of hydroponic chemicals going to your brain…I have NEVER heard that at all. Do you have a source for that claim? It sounds like some propaganda to me.

 

[edwest2]

Read this article about schizophrenia and marijuana…it seems like weed doesn’t cause psychosis.

Anyway, weed as a gateway drug is ONLY a product of it being illegal. If weed were legal, it would be no more of a gateway drug than alcohol. If someone legally goes into a store and buys weed, they are unlikely to then seek out harder drugs illegally.

As for your forgetful friend…obviously he is going to forget things while he is high. How would a drunk person do at a job?

As for your theory of hydroponic chemicals going to your brain…I have NEVER heard that at all. Do you have a source for that claim? It sounds like some propaganda to me.

Wow. So if I buy weed legally, I will not be tempted, at all, when the local dope dealer offers me some pills that he says are “a lot better than marijuana”? No logic there.

God bless,
Ed

 

[Blairamir]

I am going to guess that you have never smoked Marijuana before. That’s exactly what I thought

Anyway, there is no reason AT ALL why drinking a couple beers or a glass of scotch to relax should be any different than smoking a little bit of weed to relax. Just like alcohol, you can smoke a little bit of weed and only feel slight effects.

Other than the fact that it is illegal, there shouldn’t be an argument against it in small amounts. In fact it is undoubtedly safer than alcohol on both your body AND safer to others around you.

Weed is only sinful if you use it to excess. And to be honest if on a special occasion you get a good buzz going from weed or alcohol, I don’t really think that is sinful either (that isn’t based on church teaching or anything, just what is in my heart).

The general question is this: if recreational drug ____ is legal, then is it sinful to use in moderation? I can’t answer that question but the analogy with alcohol sounds reasonable. I recommend extreme moderation, and regular trips to the confessional. Much of the legally grown marijuana in California is probably very strong now. From my experiences with druggies it is unpredictable when someone is going flip out (on drug ___) and others are not. Very likely it’s down to the individual’s genetics, length of abuse and existing mental illness. Portugal, a fairly Catholic country, decriminalized a whole host of drugs. I would love to see the US follow suit.

scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=portugal-drug-decriminalization

It may be to me, but not to you, or to you and not to me. God instilled a conscience. What does it tell you? Do you suppose that whether or not it is a health hazard, that it is a sensible means of keeping the temple of God clean, and keeping your soul open to prayer and contact from God? Do you tend to visit the sick more often, or give alms, or visit the blessed sacrament, or discuss pot with your grandma much when you’re high? Being fat, smoking, drinking, drugs, etc. if not used responsibly, and in thanks to the glory of God are sinful. Particularly if you think they are for you and your purposes after consulting with God through your conscience in prayer.

A very thought provoking reply - thanks