Is the use of marijuana in moderation immoral?

[Katie1723]

AlanFromWichita:

Sometimes the use of marijuana can help a person penetrate into social circles where one can evangelize.

Certainly I am not advocating breaking the law, but the issue is that evangelization sometimes requires the shepherd to leave the flock, as it were, and go after the lost ones. If the lost ones are smoking pot, sometimes joining them sets you up better to evangelize than not…Alan

That’s a ridiculous notion. So if everyone is sitting around passing a “bong” are you going to “take a toke” to feel like one of them?? Or how about a few “lines of coke”?? Anyone for a snort??

Come on, use the “talents” God gave you to evangelize.
~ Kathy ~

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Magicsilence:

And that, is how liberals argue that smoking pot CAN be a good thing.

Really? Maybe I should change my affiliation. I was elected three times to precinct committeeperson position, endorsed by the conservative KRA (Kansas Republican Assembly). I had a certificate (unfortunately lost in a house fire on Good Friday this year) for being instrumental in the 1994 (or whatever year that was) Republican take-over of Congress, where we held the majority and consequently the county seats in a narrow (something like 214 to 208) victory over the liberal (anti-life, gun grabbing etc) Republicans, thus providing ongoing support for Todd Tiarht, the very conservative US representative in our district – and BTW, I was there at his victory party when he beat out the liberal Dan Glickman.

You are welcome to check up on my story. You can find the election results of at least one election (I did Google search no my name) at the election commissioner’s website.

If I am liberal, and you say that to distinguish me from you, then where are your credentials that you are more conservative" than I am?

I have no idea what you mean by scripted response.

I write what flows from my heart.

An example of a “scripted response” the way I use it is one which is parroted from earlier training, without much information. For example, “all drugs are bad” is a scripted response that is virtually meaningless unless, of course, you think coffee is evil – and of course bananas because they contain potassium which is controlled as a prescription drug.

Another such scripted response is that you classify a person as “liberal” because they don’t agree with you on your version of what is moral. Speaking like this, we become tools of the system – the real question I have is why do you think this way and so far all we have are open-ended assertions with nothing to explain them or back them up.

Look upon the situation with a loving but strict attitude. Taking drugs, ILLEGAL or NOT, is and always will be wrong. It may not always be a mortal sin, but it is ONE MORE ATTACHMENT to the world that we need to sever.

Oh, I get it. You must be one of those radicals. Either that or you deny that caffeine and potassium are drugs. Or is there a third possibility I haven’t considered?

Your assertion that all drugs are bad, legal or not, puts you IMO squarely in the “fringe” category. I wonder whether JPII or Benedict XVI ever take prescription medication. If they do, look out because they are behaving immorally.

Do you think we should take away penicillin from sick children? Do you think we should abolish insulin? Do you not realize that is what you are suggesting? That is another characteristic of “scripted” responses – the person saying them simply blurts them out withour realizing how extreme and ostensibly absolute they are.

If we took what you say at face value, we would still have polio and the Black Plague rampant – is that what you are suggesting? If not, then you had better reexamine your statements.

If people use pot to calm down that is a choice, it doesnt make it right.

You are absolutely right. The fact that people do it does not make it right.

I could just as easily argue that masturbating calmed me down. No doubt we both agree that is always sinful.

Sure you could make that argument. No doubt. Of course, not on my word but the word of learned scholars on this very forum is that female masturbation is OK and male masturbation is also OK, if they are done in the context of marriage and if the male “finishes” where he is supposed to be. To me this is strange, but from what I can gather that’s what the Holy Roman Church teaches, so who am I to say in absolute terms what is sinful?

Please, if this conversation does nothing else for you, at least consider being more careful throwing the word “always” around. It will often get you into trouble, unless of course you are around scripted individuals who examine the political/social wrapper, and not the contents, of such statements.

(continued – I must have become spoiled while indulging my verbosity on another board with a 20,000 character limit – I’ll try to do better in the future – honest.)

 

[AlanFromWichita]

(continued)

And just because taking drugs to relax is something many many people do these days ,it never makes it right. Just THINK about the implications of such a statement on pro - choice abortion groups.

Just THINK about the statements you have made and their implications on sick people and medicine. Essentially you have wiped out most modern medicine. If that is not your intent, then it is you who should be examining your own statements in various contexts.

 There is a big difference between what happens in the mind as a result of sinful inclinations and WHAT WE CAUSE by taking drugs.

I challenge you to find a person, who, having given their life up for God, would see the need for recreational drugs to “escape from life” so to speak.

See, now you’re qualifying yourself, and speaking of “recreational drugs.” That’s a whole lot different than the pseudo-absolute statements you made earlier about all drugs.

The problem is that the line between “necessary” and “recreational” is not clear. Rush Limbaugh, for example, was addicted to pain killers which, when used properly, are perfectly useful and not sinful – your earlier statements notwithstanding.

  I suggest doing some reading on the saints, (we are all called to be saints), St Francis reportedly floated, and was in regular ecstasy with Our Lord. He had no need of drugs, nor would he have ever needed them.

If Christ is so far that drugs seem like an option, then we have a problem.

I draw your attention to the Cure D’ Ars, who, though presented with tobacco, rejected it outright, though no effects on the health were known at such a time. We need only look back in history at the great saints of the faith to see what is right and wrong.

Recreational drugs are always wrong. (culpability depends)

Im sorry if you were locked up and thought it was wrong. However, here you are talking about someone with a strong relationship with Christ being given drugs AGAINST their will for the purpose of helping them. I would not doubt that your faith was present. However, this is entirely different with regards to those, of their own free will, taking recreational drugs.

OK, well why didn’t you say that in the first place? When you make blanket statements like “all drugs are wrong” then you are speaking a cliche that has no useful value. Now that you’re examining your opinion more closely, we may not be in as much disagreement as it first appears. That’s why you need people like me to help you understand what you are actually saying and how it comes across, whether I be “liberal” or simply a conservative who likes to look beneath the veneer of cliches.

I have gained more peace and joy through contemplative prayer and studying the scriptures and applying it to life than through any combination of drugs.

   Please dont tell me that one can have a strong relationship with Christ, and still want to ask if smoking pot is ok. We both know the answer.

Sorry, cannot comply because many words does not change the fact that one can have a still have a strong relationship with Christ, and still (want to) ask whether smoking pot is OK.

In general, asking whether something is a sin does not necessarily indicate sin, unless it’s on one of the few topics that are particularly knee-jerk topics such as this one.

For you, the answer is evidently no. I’ll grant you that, and you are welcome to your opinion. To me, if asking a question about a sin is tantamount to admission of a lack of relationship with Christ, then this whole forum is irrelevant because we should simply be doing what’s right and not asking for it to be clarified. When one is sufficiently guided by the Holy Spirit, then in fact this might very well become the case – specific rules are no longer issues because they are written on the heart.

Peace to you,
Alan

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Katie1723:

That’s a ridiculous notion. So if everyone is sitting around passing a “bong” are you going to “take a toke” to feel like one of them?? Or how about a few “lines of coke”?? Anyone for a snort??

Come on, use the “talents” God gave you to evangelize.

                   ~ Kathy ~

They said the same thing about Christ, who associated with drunkards, and in fact Himself drank.

Many people of his day thought his notions were ridiculous as well – to the point of killing Him.

Let’s hear your idea for evangelizing people who are doing drugs. What would you do, write them off? Funny we are supposed to “be like Christ” when it comes to admonishing the sinner, but not when it comes to uniting ourselves with other sinners.

And no, I’m not saying “take a toke to feel like one of them.” I’m saying “take a toke to earn their trust so they know you aren’t a cop and just might listen to you” for example. If not take a toke, at least don’t come at them pointing a finger or you will do no good – they will simply write you off. This, as far as I can tell, is the approach both Christ and St. Paul took. Perhaps smoking dope is sinful, but if others are joining it then the fact that I do not does not make me better than them, just less likely for them to hear me when I call out to them.

What does it mean that a good shepherd “leaves his flock?” What does it mean when St. Paul said, “to those outside the law, I become like one outside the law?” Or is following in the footsteps of Jesus changed because we so are afraid of temptation that we will only associate with people whose sins we do not know?

Alan

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Katie1723:

Come on, use the “talents” God gave you to evangelize.

I’m trying to do it now. I’m trying to help you learn a lesson about judging others based on surface observations --such as whether they wash their cups, heal on the sabbath, or smoke a joint. All of those things were against the law.

He who has ears, let him hear.

Sorry – I meant let him/her hear. (for a second I forgot I was a liberal)

Alan

 

[Rebecca_New]

deb1:

I am serious with this question. I really do not know.

I can drink a beer without getting drunk or even tipsy. I like the taste of some beers. Can you smoke a joint without getting high?

I agree with you 100%. This is where the difference is between cigarettes and pot also. We are to stay sober because we know not the hour…

 

[AlanFromWichita]

thistle:

I know what is rewuired for a sin to be mortal and anybody taking illegal drugs would definitely have met all three conditions. Every person Catholic or non-Catholic knows it is illegal to take such drugs and there cannot be a single Catholic that does not know its a mortal sin.

That is quite presumptuous, IMO.

When on the cross, Christ prayed about those who were killing Him, “Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.”

It would seem, then, that according to the criteria, killing an innocent Savior was not a mortal sin.

Smoking pot is, though, without any excuse, according to you.

Therefore, puffing on a joint is a worse sin than pounding the nails into Christ’s hands – because we know the mindset and spiritual training of the smoker well enough that we can tell just by looking at them that they are in mortal sin.

We are too well trained to classify others as sinners and to assume their motives by appearances. Not much has improved in the heart of man since the days of Christ.

Alan

 

[thistle]

AlanFromWichita:

That is quite presumptuous, IMO.

When on the cross, Christ prayed about those who were killing Him, “Father, forgive them for they know not what they do.”

It would seem, then, that according to the criteria, killing an innocent Savior was not a mortal sin.

Smoking pot is, though, without any excuse, according to you.

Therefore, puffing on a joint is a worse sin than pounding the nails into Christ’s hands – because we know the mindset and spiritual training of the smoker well enough that we can tell just by looking at them that they are in mortal sin.

We are too well trained to classify others as sinners and to assume their motives by appearances. Not much has improved in the heart of man since the days of Christ.

Alan

Sorry but you are talking nonsense and I never said or implied what you say I did.
The debate is not if killing Jesus was a sin or not.
This thread is whether taking drugs (doesn’t matter if its pot or worse) is a sin or not.
Are you trying to honestly tell me that Catholics do not or might not know that taking illegal drugs is a sin? Its probably the most widely publicised thing on the planet.
Taking drugs is a deliberate act.

 

[wabrams]

puzzleannie:

if you have never tried it, you cannot say with assurance pot is not physically addicting. as a boomer and 60s “graduate” I offer my sad experience that it is both physically and what is worse and harder to cure, psychologically addicting even when used in small amounts in a regular recreational setting.

It is my understanding from health care professionals serving our public schools and juvenile justice system that the variety of MJ being purveyed today is far more potent than what was available domestically in my day. The pot obtained overseas by those in the military in the 60s & 70s time was much more potent than what college kids were using, and the VA documents that it was much more damaging. The physiological damage of any smoked and inhaled substance on the lungs and all other susceptible organs is well documented.

Be that as it may, where it is illegal it is also immoral. Where it is illegal any use at all subsidizes organized crime, so that is enough to make it immoral.

Even if pot and other drugs were legalized globally, agriculture resources would be diverted from subsistence and food to another cash crop, destroying ability of indigenous peoples to support themselves by farming. Where other cash crops like coffee, sugar, cacao, lumber etc. have taken over the agricultural economy many harmful social effects have ensued, including pushing people off their traditional land, destruction of rain forests etc. So there is the additional problem of assessing the morality of participating in such a scenario.

From what I hear, the stuff today is “watered down” compared to what you got in the late 60’s, early 70’s. I know I smoked like a fiend in college and I kicked it completely in a day or two; can’t say that about nicotene though!

 

[wabrams]

Magicsilence:

Look upon the situation with a loving but strict attitude. Taking drugs, ILLEGAL or NOT, is and always will be wrong. It may not always be a mortal sin, but it is ONE MORE ATTACHMENT to the world that we need to sever.

If people use pot to calm down that is a choice, it doesnt make it right.

And just because taking drugs to relax is something many many people do these days ,it never makes it right. Just THINK about the implications of such a statement on pro - choice abortion groups.

The same thing can be said about a person who has a beer or two to unwind, or drinking coffee to pep yourself up in the middle of the day.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

thistle:

Sorry but you are talking nonsense and I never said or implied what you say I did.
The debate is not if killing Jesus was a sin or not.
This thread is whether taking drugs (doesn’t matter if its pot or worse) is a sin or not.
Are you trying to honestly tell me that Catholics do not or might not know that taking illegal drugs is a sin? Its probably the most widely publicised thing on the planet.
Taking drugs is a deliberate act.

Are you telling me that you never said (or wrote, please forgive me if that is the trick here) the following:

Every person Catholic or non-Catholic knows it is illegal to take such drugs and there cannot be a single Catholic that does not know its a mortal sin.

My friend, that is quite an absolute statement.

No, the debate was not whether it was a sin to nail Jesus to the cross, but you are holding people who smoke pot to a higher intellectual standard for their sins than Jesus himself did for those others.

I think it’s a fair question – what is worse, smoking pot or nailing Jesus to the cross? If it’s the latter, then keep in mind that Jesus said, “they know not what they do?”

You make very absolute, authoritative statements about what other people know. Then again, I’m talking nonsense so you should probably just ignore me and write me off as a person who enables and entices others to sin – no you didn’t say that, but it might be your best strategy to save yourself from the anguish of considering there might just be a glimmer of truth in what I write. Don’t mind me, I’m just the psycho.

The more I think about it, the more I think you need to be aware of just how seriously wrong you are with such a wide brush stroke. There are Catholics who are profoundly mentally retarded and cannot even bathe themselves – the only way to logically reconcile that fact with your claim is to say those people aren’t Catholic, or they do happen to know the Church teachings on that matter.

Also you say “every person Catholic or non-Catholic knows it’s illegal.” That is also an incorrectly absolute statement, as it is only illegal in certain areas and only has been for a certain amount of time.

Be careful, my friend, when you dismiss objections to your statements as “nonsense” as I might just have to hold up a mirror again for you.

Are you trying to honestly tell me that Catholics do not or might not know that taking illegal drugs is a sin? Its probably the most widely publicised thing on the planet.

Yes. I just saw a baptism the other day, and I honestly believe that new Catholic did not know anything about taking illegal drugs. If you don’t intend to include ALL Catholics, then don’t make absolute statements like you have.

Then again, the thread question as I understood it was about whether marijuana was intrinsically immoral and in particular is it immoral in addition to being illegal. Your argument does not even apply to Catholics living in Amsterdam, for example. You have mixed up all these issues into one big “war on drugs” glob, it would appear to me.

In the US, we tend to think the rest of the world is like us. It would seem that any “moral absolute” would carry true across boundaries. If the issue is whether it is sinful to break the law, that would be a different (albeit related) question. The question was whether marijuana was intrinsically immoral.

Peace,
Alan

 

[thistle]

I don’t actually see the need for much debate. The Church teaching on this issue is absolutley clear and an earlier poster referred us to CCC 2291 which states:

QUOTE

The use of drugs inflicts very grave damage on human health and life. Their use, except on strictly therapeutic grounds, is a grave offence…

                                              UNQUOTE

The Church does not say lesser drugs are okay or moderation is okay.
Using drugs (any kind/any amount) is a MORTAL SIN.

 

[mcliffor]

But the original post which I posted would suggest that drugs are condemned by the Church because of their life-threatening effects (not because they make you high, relaxed, drunk, etc.) Pot,being less harmful than tobacco, obviously does not fall into this category, so must it be taken for only therapeutic reasons? Although DARE would tell us that marijuana is a drug like tobacco or alcohohol, according to the catechism, a drug is something very different. Marijuana is not part of this definition.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

thistle:

I don’t actually see the need for much debate. The Church teaching on this issue is absolutley clear and an earlier poster referred us to CCC 2291 which states:

QUOTE

The use of drugs inflicts very grave damage on human health and life. Their use, except on strictly therapeutic grounds, is a grave offence…

                                              UNQUOTE

The Church does not say lesser drugs are okay or moderation is okay.
Using drugs (any kind/any amount) is a MORTAL SIN.

If you look into it further, you will find there is a huge difference between “grave matter” and “mortal sin.”

Missing Mass on Sunday is a grave matter, but is not necessarily a mortal sin because we do not claim to be able to read each others’ minds and hearts.

Leave that stuff for St. Pio. Meanwhile, consider giving up “formalas” such as outward observations as condemning evidence of what is in their heart.

You don’t think there should be a discussion, but unfortunately you have already engaged in it and made some incorrect assumptions. Therefore, one who didn’t know you better might see your assertion as someone of a retreat, coupled with last-word-itis. Trust me, I probably have the worst last-word-itis among people I know.

Then again, who knows how long this thread will live? At least this one hasn’t turned emotionally hostile – verbally maybe but as long as we can keep our cool maybe they’ll let this thread go a while.

If there really is no discussion, then you need not reply any more on this thread – however far be it from me to discourage you if you should choose to post again on the matter.

Alan

 

[thistle]

AlanFromWichita:

If you look into it further, you will find there is a huge difference between “grave matter” and “mortal sin.”

Missing Mass on Sunday is a grave matter, but is not necessarily a mortal sin because we do not claim to be able to read each others’ minds and hearts.

Leave that stuff for St. Pio. Meanwhile, consider giving up “formalas” such as outward observations as condemning evidence of what is in their heart.

You don’t think there should be a discussion, but unfortunately you have already engaged in it and made some incorrect assumptions. Therefore, one who didn’t know you better might see your assertion as someone of a retreat, coupled with last-word-itis. Trust me, I probably have the worst last-word-itis among people I know.

Then again, who knows how long this thread will live? At least this one hasn’t turned emotionally hostile – verbally maybe but as long as we can keep our cool maybe they’ll let this thread go a while.

If there really is no discussion, then you need not reply any more on this thread – however far be it from me to discourage you if you should choose to post again on the matter.

Alan

Excuse me but missing Mass on a Sunday without a serious reason is a mortal sin.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

mcliffor:

But the original post which I posted would suggest that drugs are condemned by the Church because of their life-threatening effects (not because they make you high, relaxed, drunk, etc.) Pot,being less harmful than tobacco, obviously does not fall into this category, so must it be taken for only therapeutic reasons? Although DARE would tell us that marijuana is a drug like tobacco or alcohohol, according to the catechism, a drug is something very different. Marijuana is not part of this definition.

To me, that’s the biggest problem with DARE.

Laws now in place mandate what can and cannot be told to children. It is no longer “pure” science.

When I was in fourth grade (about 1969) they gave us drug education that explained what was then known about the various effects and addictive potential for drugs. One thing that did was instill in my mind that drugs are all different, and have different effects, and not the same for each person. Even when I was using pot, I knew enough to stay away from PCP, heroin, and a number of other things that became available once I started hanging around people who had illegal substances. I credit my fourth grade education with my adamant refusal to try – even out of curiosity – certain drugs like pcp.

The other day my high school daughter was talking about an issue involving a student and drugs at school. I found out that although she graduated DARE, she didn’t even know any of the fundamentals about any drugs, or how they compare. She is a very good student so it is not that she didn’t pay attention.

Therefore, it seems from this experience that DARE is, in fact, “resistance education” more than “drug education.” I wonder if that explains why kids I thought had some kind of brain, got into heroin. That’s scary stuff.

Also, right after college I used to smoke with people who worked at the Air Force Base here – that was in 1981 when the war on drugs was just ramping up good and urine testing became common. What happened? They switched from pot to cocaine because they could do coke on Friday night and pass a UA (urinalysis) on Monday, whereas with pot it is detectable for weeks sometimes, and longer depending on the test.

This is the problem I see with lumping all drugs together in one big “JUST SAY NO” package. Kids smoke pot, then when they don’t immediately go insane they wonder whether other drugs have been similarly oversold as to their effects.

I’ve spent time with these people, and have some idea how they think. Lie or exaggerate about one thing, and the rest is immediately questioned. Otherwise lump things together that are quite different, and basically leave it to a kid to “experiment” to figure out what is only slightly harmful and the things that can kill you even on the first dose.

Alan

 

[AlanFromWichita]

thistle:

Excuse me but missing Mass on a Sunday without a serious reason is a mortal sin.

It is? Since when? That isn’t the Church teaching. According to her, missing Mass does not automatically constitute mortal sin.

Really it pays to know when you are certain and when you are just speculating.

Then again, I only know as much as I learn from my sources. Here is one:

AAA forum

For a comparison of grave matter and mortal sin, here is an excerpt from CCC:

[1858](javascript:OpenPopupWindow()
Grave matter is specified by the Ten Commandments, corresponding to the answer of Jesus to the rich young man: "Do not kill, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and your mother."132 The gravity of sins is more or less great: murder is graver than theft. One must also take into account who is wronged: violence against parents is in itself graver than violence against a stranger.

[1859](javascript:OpenPopupWindow() Mortal sin requires full knowledge and complete consent. It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God’s law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice. Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart133 do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.

If you don't know the difference between grave matter and mortal sin, then you might wish to learn more before you make accusatory statements toward others who are trying to speak the truth.

If you have personal opinions on a matter, then fine – let’s hear them. Just don’t present your personal opinions as if they were infallible teachings, or you will never be able to convince anybody of your point except the gullible and ignorant.

Alan

 

[AlanFromWichita]

thistle:

Excuse me but missing Mass on a Sunday without a serious reason is a mortal sin.

Aha. “without a serious reason.”

Now you are catching on, and qualifying your statements. I asserted that missing Mass is not necessarily a mortal sin.

Since you have added the qualification “without a serious reason” then you agree with me, and I’m pleased about that.

Unfortunately, you are still only partially correct, in that there are other criteria than “without a serious reason.” Therefore, your statement is closer to the truth than the one I rejected, but still falls short.

I know it’s off the original topic, but the issue at hand here is making generalized statements that do not necessarily apply in any given situation, and holding them to be absolute truth.

On topic with the above background, again, I do not believe that smoking marijuana – even if it is illegal – automatically constitutes mortal sin. Are you beginning to see where this is going? It isn’t about excusing bad behavior in others – it’s about not being sinfully judgmental by our own reaction to it.

Alan

 

[thistle]

Originally Posted by AlanFromWichita
If you look into it further, you will find there is a huge difference between “grave matter” and "mortal sin."

It sounds like you are still on pot.
You are wrong. Grave matter and mortal sin are not different.

CCC 1857:

For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent.
You say missing Mass on Sunday might be grave matter but not a mortal sin. That is wrong. It is a mortal sin to miss Sunday Mass without serious reason.

I repeat CCC 2291:

The use of drugs inflicts very grave damage on human health and life. Their use, except on strictly therapeutic grounds, is a grave offence…

If you do not believe its a mortal sin then you are not accepting the Church’s teaching.

Anyone who takes drugs (including pot) is a fool.
It also seems to me your excuse for smoking it under the guise of penetrating groups to evangelise is you trying to justify to yourself or someone you know as a drug taker.

 

[AlanFromWichita]

Originally Posted by AlanFromWichita
If you look into it further, you will find there is a huge difference between “grave matter” and "mortal sin."

It sounds like you are still on pot.
You are wrong. Grave matter and mortal sin are not different.

If that were the case, I would hereby recommend you might try some yourself. Maybe you could more easily set aside your preconceived notions.

CCC 1857:

For a sin to be mortal, three conditions must together be met: Mortal sin is sin whose object is grave matter and which is also committed with full knowledge and deliberate consent.
You say missing Mass on Sunday might be grave matter but not a mortal sin. That is wrong. It is a mortal sin to miss Sunday Mass without serious reason.

Ummm, are we certain it is I who am the psycho here? I have the credentials but that doesn’t mean I play the role well.

The church says three conditions must be met for mortal sin. I say that one condition being met is insufficient. How is it that means I am not thinking clearly, or am in any way contradicting the Catechism?

It is certainly NOT wrong that one condition being met does not imply the other two are.

Come to think of it, if you’re not smoking pot, what are you doing and is it as good as it seems?

I repeat CCC 2291:

The use of drugs inflicts very grave damage on human health and life. Their use, except on strictly therapeutic grounds, is a grave offence…

If you do not believe its a mortal sin then you are not accepting the Church’s teaching.

I believe the Church teachings speak for themselves in this matter, and they do NOT reach the conclusion that any behavior including use of drugs, may be grave matter but do not constitute mortal sin.

Anyone who takes drugs (including pot) is a fool.

Then my father was a fool for taking drugs that extended his life by seven years after his cardiac arrest.

Really in Christian charity, I suggest you be careful the way you swing those blanket, absolute statements around. One of these days you might offend somebody no matter how hard they try to remain of neutral emotion. I have it on good authority that offending people can sometimes get you hurt.

That said, I am not offended by you, but more curious at how you can make the statements you make, juxtaposed the way you are doing them. To me it’s an indication of just how deep the programming is for people who say things without understanding them, and then do not catch on. I have a relative who has physical brain damage from a car hitting him when he was 9 years old (he was in crosswalk in front of school, walking with the light) and was born with cerebral palsy. He has problems learning math, and learning to drive because his brain centers are damaged where he learns from experience. Therefore, he keeps making the same mistake over and over. Outside of something like that (and if this is the case I will ask your pardon but still with the caution above) I normally do not see this many iterations where I go around and keep hearing the same assertions rewarmed.

It also seems to me your excuse for smoking it under the guise of penetrating groups to evangelise is you trying to justify to yourself or someone you know as a drug taker.

maybe so, maybe not. It’s fine for you to speculate, but the fact is that the concept IMO is still commensurate with what St. Paul was teaching. You don’t evangelize a den of thieves by going in with the SWAT team; you do it by befriending them.

Alan