Smoking a Sin??

  • Thread starter Thread starter iguana27
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
40.png
DominvsVobiscvm:
Did you bother to read what I just wrote? Apparently not.
Click to expand...
I did but your original post said something different.
 
I am a brand new Catholic and I have been smoking for a year. I do smoke in excess. I think that it is a sin and I am trying desperately to stop. However, I do see myself smoking an occasional cigar or pipe as I get older. Those are one of lifes little pleasures that aren’t too easy to abuse. (plus they taste and smell much better than nasty old cigarettes) God help all who struggle with cigarettes as I am. Ask the saints and Mary to pray for us dumb smokers.
 
I did but your original post said something different.
Click to expand...
No, it didn’t. My original post was not addressing tobacco abuse, but the use of tobacco itself. I specifically made mention that we cannot judge one who smokes, so long as he does it moderately:
If you personally believe its gravely harmful to your body, and you still smoke, then it would be sinful. A person who did not have the same conviction as you would not be sinning when they smoke. Its as simple as that, and for any Catholic to say that smoking is absolutely sinful is assuming for himself the same heretical claim of authority that Protestants do, based on our private interpretation of data.
Click to expand...
Is someone asks you a question, especially on a point of doctrine or morals, the first thing you should present him with isn’t your personal opinion, but what the Church has to say about it.
Click to expand...
Scott Waddell did exactly that. The Church says that the moderate use of tobacco is, in and of itself, not sinful. So the matter is settled, case-closed, despite whatever your personal opinions might be. To say that smoking is absolutely sinful is itself a sin against faith and charity.
Click to expand...
I don’t see how I could’ve been any clearer.
 
Alcohol and cigarettes are not similar chemically, etc…the comparison is fallacious. Scientists agree that nicotine is a narcotic. There is no beneficial use for cigarette smoking…and the effects on the human body are grave.
 
The moral relativity within this thread is interesting.

If you have no problems with cigarette smoking…then you shouldn’t have any problems with heroin use.
 
40.png
beng:
I’m not sure that Fr COrapi would say that smoking is a sin.

And btw, we have some Saints who are smoker. One of them is the great Saint Pius X (Pope)
Click to expand...
Saints aren’t sinless.
 
I suppose if one wants to be technical…in regards to…

Catholic Catechism:

2291 The use of drugs inflicts very grave damage on human health and life. Their use, except on strictly therapeutic grounds, is a grave offense. Clandestine production of and trafficking in drugs are scandalous practices. They constitute direct co-operation in evil, since they encourage people to practices gravely contrary to the moral law.

There isn’t any classification as to which “drugs” are grave.

In closing…just remember, just because something is legal doesn’t mean it’s moral. Tomorrow, if heroin were to be legalized…there would be individuals that would consume the substance…because afterall, just because it’s legal…it must mean it’s okay. Our economy flourishes on tobacco…Afghanistan’s economy flourishes upon the opium poppy…this is why we didn’t bomb their fields during the war.
 
40.png
agname:
The moral relativity within this thread is interesting.

If you have no problems with cigarette smoking…then you shouldn’t have any problems with heroin use.
Click to expand...
Sorry, dude, but I find no reason to bind the conscience of the individual when the Church does not bind the conscience of the individual. You quote a Catechism paragraph on illicit drug use, but repeatedly throughout this thread, it has been pointed out that there is another paragraph in the Catechism that speaks directly to tobacco use. And it states that moderate use is not sinful. So it is not moral relativity. It’s freedom of conscience (in the proper sense).

To compare tobacco use (not necessarily cigarettes) to heroin is a bit of a stretch. Yes, they both chemically stimulate the body. But the intent behind the use is as different as night and day. I smoke a pipe as a relaxing way to chill out, read, spend time outside, socialize etc (in this way, it is very much like alcohol). I doubt heroin is used for those purposes, but instead it is used to blow one’s mind out of consciousness, to escape from the realities of life.

If one is addicted to nicotine, it is a different story altogether, but I don’t think you will find anyone here debating that.
 
how can the church be critical of illegal or illicit drugs, sometime in the future they will be legal, many of them do not physically do as much damage to the body as smoking.

society makes numerous things crimes at some point and at some point later on these more minor or so called moral crimes are later repealed or watered down, drug are one of them.

Lets ask ourselves the question, is illicit drugs more dangerous to the body than smoking, answer- some yes some no.

The Church does not require us to follow the law of the land if it violates our relationship with God, God comes first. Society makes many of its crimes according to the times we live in.

Illicit drug use can be no more of a crime against God than smoking, it is the excessive part that is sinful according to the Church.
 
Tim Hayes:
Illicit drug use can be no more of a crime against God than smoking, it is the excessive part that is sinful according to the Church.
Click to expand...
The Catechism says otherwise. It says drug use (not excess of drug use) is a grave offense. Whether it’s legal in your country or not.
 
Tim Hayes:
how can the church be critical of illegal or illicit drugs, sometime in the future they will be legal, many of them do not physically do as much damage to the body as smoking.

society makes numerous things crimes at some point and at some point later on these more minor or so called moral crimes are later repealed or watered down, drug are one of them.

Lets ask ourselves the question, is illicit drugs more dangerous to the body than smoking, answer- some yes some no.

The Church does not require us to follow the law of the land if it violates our relationship with God, God comes first. Society makes many of its crimes according to the times we live in.

Illicit drug use can be no more of a crime against God than smoking, it is the excessive part that is sinful according to the Church.
Click to expand...
Smoking and drugs are 2 different things. Compare drugs to alcohol if you like but definintly not smoking. Both drugs and alcohol affect the brain, they alter the senses, smoking does not. Although one could say that drugs and drinking in themselves are not a sin. What they do is lead you to sin, so people this is putting yourself in the way of occassion to sin,:eek: this is where the sin is!! Agreed - Government Law and Gods Law - two different things!!!
 
Right on, Mandi!

To use drugs to alter our consciousness is to sacrifice our will and self-control - that is why certain drugs are inherently sinful. That is also why the use of alcohol is morally justified until you get drunk, which is to alter your consciousness and sacrifice your will. Tobacco does not do this.

The same is true of addiction - there are different kinds of addiction. Addiction to caffeine, mentioned by Faithful2Rome, is different than addiction to Heroine because the addiction has only small physical withdrawal effects. Addiction to Heroine actually affects a person’s psychological functioning and therefore has a greater effect on the will.

However, damage to the body is also a consideration in deciding sin and that is where tobacco smoking comes into question.

This is not a morally relativistic argument. It is an argument about a prudential decision. Can tobacco smoking be sinful? Yes! Is it **inherently **sinful? No. At what point does it become sinful? At the point that it becomes damaging to the body or obsessive to the will. When is that point reached? That is a decision of prudence.
 
40.png
agname:
Saints aren’t sinless.
Click to expand...
Since Saints mean that he goes to Heaven ASAP (most likely after his death), that means that he never gone to purgatory, that means that he never committed any sin. Even if the saint (such as Pius X) had the Last Rite (Extreme Unction), if smoking is a sin and he’s forgiven by that last rite, he should be in purgatory for a short while. Yet, he’s a saint.
 
As far as I’m concerned, this case is closed.

The Catechism says that moderate tobacco use is alright. It doesn’t say anoything about any other particular drug, but under the generic word “drugs” warns against abusing substances that harm our body.

So smoking a cigarette, in and of itself, isn’t a sin. Period. This is what Christ teaches, though his Church.

Any neo-Puritan teaching contrary to this one is of the devil.
 
Wow!

Did I stumble onto the puritan website???
They better keep all this wicked tobacco use in mind when the open GK Chesterton’s cause. He positively praised tobacco.

Here’s my take: Smoking is a sin if it’s cheap cigarettes, but it’s postively virtuous if it’s pipe or cigar smoking. (decent cigars that is: swisher sweets would be a venial sin)

Now, dipping copenhagen…that’s really grave matter.

Chris C.
 
40.png
Arrowood:
This is not a morally relativistic argument. It is an argument about a prudential decision. Can tobacco smoking be sinful? Yes! Is it **inherently **sinful? No. At what point does it become sinful? At the point that it becomes damaging to the body or obsessive to the will. When is that point reached? That is a decision of prudence.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

Very well put, Arrowood. As numerous others have also said, moderate smoking is no more sinful than moderate alcohol usage (or Pepsi “usage,” for that matter), or fast-food “usage”.

Catholicism isn’t Puritanism.

And remember to cultivate prudence… the Church doesn’t give us a manual we can turn to for every single moral issue. Learn the principles, pray regularly, receive the sacraments often, and when necessary, consult someone who is well-versed in moral theology.
 
Things to think about…
  1. Individuals smoke cigarettes purely
    for its narcotic effect.
  2. Even the moderate use of cigarette
    smoking destroys lung tissue.
  3. The moderate utilization of alcohol
    does not have negative effects on the
    human body. The body can safely metabolize
    alcohol in low to moderate doses.
  4. Doctors are known to tell patients
    to drink two glasses of wine a day…
    in conjunction with prescribing either crestor,
    gemfibrozil, probucol, or clofibrate.
    Alcohol is believed to reduce the risk of
    coronary heart disease (at least in part) by
    reducing serum levels of LDL (bad) cholesterol.
  5. 99% of doctors are against cigarette smoking.
  6. In can be shown that heroin use intavenously
    is safer for the human body…than an individual
    smoking a cigarette. For instance, heroin when used intravenously
    bypasses the liver, etc. Cigarette smoke can not
    by pass the lungs. Cigarette smoking is shown to
    be more addictive than heroin and cocaine.
  7. What’s the difference between enhanced delivery cigarettes (we
    know tobacco companies deliberately worked on increasing
    the addictiveness of cigarettes) or tobacco laced with heroin?
 
40.png
DominvsVobiscvm:
As far as I’m concerned, this case is closed.

The Catechism says that moderate tobacco use is alright. It doesn’t say anoything about any other particular drug, but under the generic word “drugs” warns against abusing substances that harm our body.

So smoking a cigarette, in and of itself, isn’t a sin. Period. This is what Christ teaches, though his Church.

Any neo-Puritan teaching contrary to this one is of the devil.
Click to expand...
The Catechism suffers from ambiguity on this matter. Cigarette smoking harms the body even in moderate doses.
 
40.png
beng:
Since Saints mean that he goes to Heaven ASAP (most likely after his death), that means that he never gone to purgatory, that means that he never committed any sin. Even if the saint (such as Pius X) had the Last Rite (Extreme Unction), if smoking is a sin and he’s forgiven by that last rite, he should be in purgatory for a short while. Yet, he’s a saint.
Click to expand...
Saints aren’t sinless…no one is.
 
40.png
Mandi:
Smoking and drugs are 2 different things. Compare drugs to alcohol if you like but definintly not smoking. Both drugs and alcohol affect the brain, they alter the senses, smoking does not. Although one could say that drugs and drinking in themselves are not a sin. What they do is lead you to sin, so people this is putting yourself in the way of occassion to sin,:eek: this is where the sin is!! Agreed - Government Law and Gods Law - two different things!!!
Click to expand...
Mandi, you’re completely nescient on this matter. Nicotine is considered a narcotic by scientists…this is why individuals smoke cigarettes…for the high. Tobacco companies worked on ways to enhance the delivery system…to increase the addictiveness of cigarettes. Alcohol can be absorbed safely in moderate amounts…cigarette smoking destroys lung tissue even with moderate smoking.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top