Pope on Pot. Wait. That doesn't sound right

[ae22]

“If we say ‘yes’ to these things, there will be no room for illicit drug use, for alcohol abuse, for other forms of addiction”

He mentioned alcohol separately, meaning he views it separately. If you want to view his statement that way, fine! Great! Alcohol can lead to misery, and we’re better off without it. I don’t drink myself. But if someone wants to drink alcohol and stop before the point of drunkenness, they aren’t sinning, put it that way.

If you are looking for a moral principle, start with the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

 

[ae22]

What about coffee? Caffeine is a drug. Is it medicinal if you have a cup in the morning, but recreational, and thus verboten, to meet a co-worker at Dunkin’ Donuts for a coffee and bagel?

That interpretation is silly. I am sorry, but it is. It’s analyzing the letter of the law (not even the law, but an off-the-cuff comment by the Holy Father that was translated into English) far too closely. It comes down to this: are you putting your use of substances before God? Are you allowing your reason to become impaired? If yes, you are sinning. If not, you are fine.

 

[pnewton]

If you are looking for a moral principle, start with the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

Well, of course. Where in the name of Mike would you think I might start?

What about coffee? Caffeine is a drug. Is it medicinal if you have a cup in the morning, but recreational, and thus verboten, to meet a co-worker at Dunkin’ Donuts for a coffee and bagel?

That interpretation is silly.

Caffeine is silly? Why bring it up? Or are you saying it is silly to try and find moral principles in the Catholic Church? Is it silly to just disagree with you, and I note, I have not disagreed with anyone, but merely stated I was going to look and try and discern the difference? Is seeking knowledge silly?

 

[ae22]

scborromeo.org/ccc/p3s2c2a5.htm

I brought caffeine up because if you are going to apply the Holy Father’s statement to one legal drug which is permitted in moderation by the Church (alcohol), it logically needs to be applied to others (caffeine, nicotine).

It certainly isn’t silly to disagree with me. It’s silly to apply the words “drug use” (which commonly means “illicit drug use” in English) to legal and morally neutral substances as well.

No, it isn’t silly to seek knowledge. I said to start with the CCC because of what it says (see link at top). It mentions avoiding the excess of alcohol and other things like food and medicine, and talks about drugs in a different category.

If I was uncharitable to you, it certainly wasn’t my intent. I am sorry.

 

[pnewton]

No, it isn’t silly to seek knowledge. I said to start with the CCC because of what it says (see link at top). It mentions avoiding the excess of alcohol and other things like food and medicine, and talks about drugs in a different category.

All I want to know is why? What makes a drug a drug. As you point out, alcohol and caffeine are both drugs, acceptable in moderation. Other drugs are not acceptable in moderation. These drugs are called “drugs”. So to understand the moral principles, it is necessary for me to go deeper. Otherwise I have definitions that are circular.

 

[BeingSaved]

The Holy Father did not make an exception for alcohol in his statement. He said:

“Here I would reaffirm what I have stated on another occasion: No to every type of drug use. It is as simple as that”

PNewton, this is the first time I am running across your posting,…and I find you most unique and enjoyable,.esp your sense of humour…you make me laugh…
…thank you so much,…I needed that! hee…
hee…


the cat…

 

[BeingSaved]

I haven’t judged you at all. I do not know you, and even if I did, I still wouldn’t judge you. Our actions may be bad, but we are all created in God’s image. I’m certainly not going to identify someone as an internet forum as a bad person or a ‘prude’ (you say that like it’s a bad thing) over something they said.

1. Allowed the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass to be celebrated with valid matter.
2. Doesn’t really matter, the negatives can’t possibly outweigh positive #1.

People make unwise choices with a LOT of things. The answer isn’t to make anything that can possibly be used for evil illegal. For one thing, anyone who wants it can just buy it on the black market, but with the possibility of adulterants, an increase in organized crime and violence, and burden on our court system…but, also, we’re free to make choices. Those choices have consequences, both here on Earth and after we are judged by God.

Matthew 11:19 tells how the Pharisees accused Jesus of being a glutton and a drunkard. Had He simply been drinking unfermented grape juice, this most certainly would not have been the case. No, it was wine, and it was fermented. DRUNKENNESS is condemned many times in the Bible, but consumption of alcohol in moderation is not.

hello ae22!

No, I was joking with you about the judging part, I didn’t think you were,…and I
was trying to add more info with the ‘prude’ comment,…I think prudence is a good thing, good quality, however, prude is a word to describe someone who goes too far in a good direction, into…scrupulosity,…(sp? right?)
anyway,…
The Pharisees accused Jesus of these things but their words were often incorrect about him, so we can’t go by that. He did eat with ‘sinners’ . (this doesn’t equate with Jesus himself sinning, because we know He never did)

The wine in communion is a fruit of the earth and because it is used in communion, it has a very good purpose, …I agree,…

There is a LOT of Truth in what I am saying about wine, oinos in the Bible, and it is not from a place of thinking it is wrong, then trying to make the Bible say it is. I do not know if the use of alcohol is wrong, actually, according to the Bible, but there are some things I DO KNOW,…coming in the next post.

 

[BeingSaved]

P.S. although I am arguing some points with you, I am not 'against your opinion or ideas, or you,…I like you

More re Pharisees,…Pharisees saw Jesus eating with sinners who were probably
over-eating, (gluttinous,) and overdrinking (wine-bibbers) and every other kind of sinner
amoung them, and judged Jesus the same as those He was reaching out to, ie His words, “its the sick that need a doctor”. Jesus said.

This following is what I discovered from scripture studies and from historical
sources of the times of Jesus in Israel.

1. Oinos is a word for wine, used in the NT and it includes both unfermented
   juice from the grape, and fermented juice from the grape.
2. Fermentation was a process that was difficult to control in NewTest. times
   often producing ‘sour’ batches, etc.
3. Contrary to the ‘hot climate’ argument against thinking that any ‘oinos= wine’
   listed in the bible could be anything but fermented, since heat causes
   fermentation to increase, and they had no refridgerators in those days;
   actually just the opposite is true about fermentation in hot climates.
4. The opposite is this, following, that fermentation and its’ processes
   were so unpredictable to give a desired end result, that the people
   preferred another process instead, and that was the ‘making of new
   wine.’
5. How could they have ‘new wine’ at any other time of the year
   than just at the grape harvest? They had a way to do this,…
   They also had a way to preserve the grapes over a long period of time,.
   after they were picked.
   They would preserve grapes, and then make the oinos that was
   unfermented, right at the time they needed the drink, ie. squeezing
   the grapes into a cup, (this was done by the Romans too)
6. I have proofs for what I have written above,…(if you want to look into it, tell me)
   ‘New Wine’ was the preferred drink, which was unfermented,…
   so it is very possible at the wedding of Cana, that Jesus
   created ‘new wine’ out of the water,…saving the ‘best’ for last.

 

[BeingSaved]

All I want to know is why? What makes a drug a drug. As you point out, alcohol and caffeine are both drugs, acceptable in moderation. Other drugs are not acceptable in moderation. These drugs are called “drugs”. So to understand the moral principles, it is necessary for me to go deeper. Otherwise I have definitions that are circular.

Perhaps you could draw the lines like this,…administering ‘medication’ to those who are in pain, is fine, other situations do not require their use, therefore they are being ‘misused’.

You could say that alcohol is a ‘medication’ to be used in situations where people are ‘unhappy’ therefore it is a type of psychiatric drug, which is beneficial. Those using it are not clinically ‘unhappy’ though, and alcohol is never prescribed by doctors to help unhappy people because it can actually cause depression.

When substances are wrongfully used in context that they were not made for, then they are being abused by people who are using them to abuse themselves with it, just like people misusing sex are abusing their own bodies and inner selves.
?

 

[ae22]

Well, Romans 13 indicates we are to obey just civil authorities. If the government said tomorrow that alcohol was illegal for anything other than sacramental or medicinal use, we would be obliged to obey that law. Likewise, if marijuana were to be made fully legal tomorrow and was marketed as an FDA-approved OTC medication for something, it wouldn’t be sinful to use it at that point.

It also says “strictly therapeutic grounds” is an exception for drug use being disordered. If a heroin addict is in withdrawal, for example, the only thing that’s going to stop that withdrawal is an opiate. They literally need opiates to function properly. Withdrawal from benzodiazepines (Valium, Xanax, Klonopin, etc) can actually kill a person. While that person would obviously need to take steps to overcome their addiction, at that point, it really is therapeutic. While self-medication is certainly not advisable, it’s impossible to know the reason WHY someone is using a drug. Maybe the person has cancer, has tried prescription drugs without success, but smoking marijuana helps them eat and lessens the pain from their cancer, even though medicinal marijuana is not legal in their jurisdiction. Is that person sinning by smoking marijuana? It really isn’t a black and white issue. Like I said earlier in this thread, it’s REALLY complicated.

 

[pnewton]

Perhaps you could draw the lines like this,…administering ‘medication’ to those who are in pain, is fine, other situations do not require their use, therefore they are being ‘misused’.

You could say that alcohol is a ‘medication’ to be used in situations where people are ‘unhappy’ therefore it is a type of psychiatric drug, which is beneficial. Those using it are not clinically ‘unhappy’ though, and alcohol is never prescribed by doctors to help unhappy people because it can actually cause depression.

That is one way to understand alcohol. I guess one can say caffeine is useful for acute drowsiness? In this context, it too could be said to be abused if used in lieu of sleep. Yet if marijuana was legal, could it not be said to be a treatment for acute stress?

For now, this is moot. As the above post states, it is illegal and all have an obligation to obey civil authorities. Catholics should also heed ecclesial authorities.

 

[ae22]

It’s like with anything else. Take masturbation, for example. Masturbation is a gravely disordered action, but there are many factors which reduce the culpability of it.

Stealing a loaf of bread because your family is starving would not be as sinful as robbing an old lady at gunpoint for fun. It isn’t just with drug use, it’s with anything. Talk to your confessor. He would know exactly how sinful something would be in your case. My case may be different, even if the circumstances are similar.

 

[pnewton]

Well, Romans 13 indicates we are to obey just civil authorities. If the government said tomorrow that alcohol was illegal for anything other than sacramental or medicinal use, we would be obliged to obey that law. Likewise, if marijuana were to be made fully legal tomorrow and was marketed as an FDA-approved OTC medication for something, it wouldn’t be sinful to use it at that point.

Now that would be one criteria.

I know that I have used alcohol half a dozen times in my life for acute stress, when days were so bad and so draining that I had to go home to a couple of beers or a glass of wine, or even a shot of whiskey. Some days are like that. I also see benefit to the mind and spirit of recreational respites where one takes a break from one’s vocational responsibilities for a few days and engages in alcohol or tobacco. These two are legal at this time.

Man, I haven’t had a cigar in six almost a year. I think next week would be a good time as I overlook the Comal.

 

[ae22]

And how would Romans 13 apply to, say, a Catholic living in Saudi Arabia? As far as I know, alcohol is not legal there. But is it considered a just government, considering that Christians can’t even worship publicly there?

 

[pnewton]

And how would Romans 13 apply to, say, a Catholic living in Saudi Arabia? As far as I know, alcohol is not legal there. But is it considered a just government, considering that Christians can’t even worship publicly there?

Except for liturgy, there is no moral obligation to drink alcohol. Therefore, even if alcohol is prohibited when Catholic doctrine does not require such a prohibition, one would have to abstain to obey civil authorities.

 

[ae22]

I don’t know if there’s an exception for sacramental use…I would imagine there isn’t. Christians are treated very poorly in that region.

 

[ae22]

That gets into other complicated issues, like the HHS mandate. There’s no requirement for Catholics to run a business. If a Catholic DOES run a business, obeying civil authorities would mean violating the laws of our faith regarding contraception. Civil disobedience of unjust laws are not only permitted, but encouraged.

 

[pnewton]

That gets into other complicated issues, like the HHS mandate. There’s no requirement for Catholics to run a business. If a Catholic DOES run a business, obeying civil authorities would mean violating the laws of our faith regarding contraception. Civil disobedience of unjust laws are not only permitted, but encouraged.

I can’t see earning a living being a valid comparison with drinking. I think it best to stick to close analogies to keep other variables at bay.

If someone thinks marijuana should be legal, does this mean they are not obligate to follow the law nonetheless? The same applies to alcohol. We obey laws, whether we think they are just in accordance to Catholic doctrine or not. It is only when we can not obey a law and still be a faithful Catholic that one may exercise civil disobedience.

 

[GEddie]

Considering the extremely draconic law enforcement in the KSA, I’d say that to not follow the law re alcohol, however unjust, would be a sin against one’s own life.

And no, there is no liturgical exemption there. One cannot even go to Christian worship there, unless one has access into a foreign embassy.

For a Christian in Saudi Arabia, alcohol would really be the least of one’s concerns.

ICXC NIKA

 

[BeingSaved]

I had another idea on the Christian view toward things like alcohol, smoking (nicotine) and
drinking caffeine (coffee and tea,- some Prot. avoid caffeine completely re: maintaining their bodily temple in the best way, by keeping as many chemicals etc. out of it)

Apostle Paul wrote that although ‘all things are legal to him’, he did not use all things,…further, as an example, “a brother with a weaker conscience than Paul had”, this conscience had to do with eating meat from the market that ‘might’ have come from
an offering to a false god.

Paul didn’t abstain from meat, but around the weaker conscience brother, he did abstain.

This type of thing,…not everyone is on the same page with what is ok and what isn’t,
ie if with believers who abstain from alcohol, then abstaining for their sake, is a good thing, if with those who abstain from caffeine, (and there are people who do) then abstain,…

also Paul “became a Jew” with the Jews, in order to win some to Jesus…,ie he had the freedom not to abstain, but he went along with their rules, in order to win even one to Christ,…

Then, use of substances for a Christian can also be put into this type of category following
there is the natural level of living for a Christian, then
up above that, there is walking in the Spirit,

alcohol is something that is on the natural level, bodily level,…and if someone is walking
“in the Spirit” and is living there on that level,
alcohol may very well pull this person down out of the “walking in the SPirit” with Christ,
and down into just living on the natural plain or level as a Christian,…

therefore alcohol would be a stumblingblock for that Christian and may hold them
to a physical plain into living more in their ‘old nature’ than moving on to live in their
‘new nature’ in Christ Jesus.

This is another consideration for Christians when looking at substances,…
if the Christian is living only on a natural plain, then there is no difference,…
but if the Christian is 'going on to more spiritual living, ie and can walk and live in the superantrual spiritual plain for extended periods of time,
then alcohol can be an impediment to that,…

kind of like fasting,…fasting is for the purpose of getting the spirit of the person to take its rightful place on Top of the body, leading the body,…

I think it is one reason Jesus refused the ‘sour wine’ on the cross, as he must have been
“in the spirit” as he went through the passion ordeal. Sour wine would definitely have been
fermented,…and a type of drug,…which may have pulled him out of being “in the spirit”

check out “in the Spirit” as in Apostle John, alone in jail on an island prison,…“John was IN the SPirit, on the Lord’s day.”

So while use of substances may be licit, as a. Paul said, they may not be expedient, to the ends of a spiritual Christian, trying to “Walk in the Spirit and by doing this, he will not fulfill the lusts of the flesh” Bible quote.

This ties in to the poster ae22 about masturbation in this thread,…masturb. brings the spiritual Christian right out of “walking in the Spirit and fulfilling the lusts of the flesh”
entering into a fleshly endeavor, brings the spiritual walk down to the natural only level.

This is why people in fasting and prayer also abstain from sex, which is legal, but not helpful because it also pulls a person back down to earth to walking only in the natural,…

follow me,…?

This ties in with the Catholic person I met who talked to me about people who had marriage
without the sexual union happening,…to further them into God’s things, same with the idea of celibate-ness on purpose,…
it is an indication in ie. Paul that he desired to forego in order to 'attain to more revelation and higher 'walking in the Spirit and spiritual htings, which explains
the idea that
a "married woman is thinking on her husband and family, while a single woman can
think on and walk more 'in the SPirit and fulfill spiritual things moreso, a married woman
cannot abstain from food, from sex, from cares of this world, easily,…she is obligated
to please her husband and care for the family, and the husband may not be a spiritual Christian, maybe just a ‘natural’ one, or not even a Christian at all.

from the writings of Paul, my ideas, taken from reading what he wrote.