Why Marijuana in itself is NOT sinful

[Zatzat]

I have personally never touched any illegal drugs but I do feel that marijuana should be legalized as it is in Canada. It should be legal to own a small amount of marijuana for personal use. Marijuana isn’t very harmful to your health if at all. The only thing I can see about marijuana that might make it harmful to your health is the idea that it could be harmful to your lungs.

Hate to break it to you…but marijuana is illegal in Canada. Medicinal marijuana, with a Doctors prescription is of course legal, but any other possession or consumption of said product, is contrary to the CDSA.

The confusion comes from the fact that 10 years ago, the Liberal Government had proposed a bill to decriminalize marijuana…that Bill died in the house and was never past.

All the media exposure at the mere mention of the bill proposal confused an entire generation of ill informed youth…meaning that you’re not alone in thinking that weed is legal.

‘…challenges to marijuana laws at the federal level have not resulted in the deletion of the appropriate articles from the Criminal Code of Canada and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. Police and prosecution services in other Canadian jurisdictions still pursue criminal charges for marijuana possession.’

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_legalization_in_Canada

 

[jjjhens]

I would like to get some feedback from my fellow CA posters/readers. According to this current church doctrine, the use of drugs inflicts grave damage unless it is strictly for therapeutic grounds:

---

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.

---

Both alcohol and marijuana are drugs, i.e. substances used to alter our states of consciousness. Therefore, I assume the use of either alcohol or marijuana would cause a grave offense by church standards, correct? However, I think one can certainly make an exception for the use of wine at mass, as it would definitely fall under the therapeutic grounds clause.

Are there other uses of either drug that could be labeled therapeutic? One can make the case for the therapeutic use of marijuana when it is prescribed by a physician for pain relieve or nausea suppression etc. I suppose one may argue that drinking a glass of wine a day is therapeutic for one’s heart too, based on some medical studies. However, that can lead to a slippery slope, of that one glass of wine leading to one or two extra glasses, once the wine bottle is open.

If one resorts to saying that alcohol use in moderation is justified because it “gladdens the heart”, then I suppose one could say that marijuana use in moderation also “gladdens the heart” or “gladdens the mind”…take your pick.

I am bringing this up because I have been a lifelong Catholic, but have only recently started to really appreciate the beauty and power of my Catholic faith, and make a firm commitment to live by all of the church’s tenants. I honestly didn’t know what the church’s teachings were on the use of recreational drugs, such as alcohol and marijuana, until I found this website. I always assumed that abuse of any drug would be a sin, but didn’t know anything more than that.

FYI, I have personally used both alcohol and marijuana over the past several years. I am fortunate not to have an addiction to either…I have not used either substance for several months at a time, simply because I’ve had no desire to use them. However, I do occasionally enjoy using both substances. Alcohol, when in certain social settings, and marijuana when I decide that I’d like to really immerse myself in a musical performance.

I am bringing this up because personal usage of marijuana is currently legal in Alaska. Likewise, come November, Californians may vote for it to be made legal too:

money.cnn.com/2010/03/25/news/economy/marijuana_legalization_tax/index.htm

I am leaning towards a personal judgement that the only safe way to proceed is to completely give up the use of alcohol and marijuana, unless one is at peace determining that their own recreational use of either substance is therapeutic. I don’t know if I am comfortable doing that though, but am still on the fence.

In any case, your thoughts are appreciated…especially from folks in AK or CA. In other states, marijuana use is a sin, per church rules to follow local laws that don’t contradict church teachings.

Thanks for your feedback!

 

[BobObob]

I would like to get some feedback from my fellow CA posters/readers. According to this current church doctrine, the use of drugs inflicts grave damage unless it is strictly for therapeutic grounds:

---

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.

---

I live in northern California

One needs to remember that the Catechism of the Catholic Church is not, strictly speaking, an infallible text. The CCC is kind of a compilation of the Church teachings in a generally easy to find and easy to find format. It is (mostly) based off of previous Church teachings, and thus many of the things in there are authoritative.

When my Christian Moral Principles professor at my Catholic college was covering the Church’s position on the use of (recreational) drugs, he basically explained it like this: You may not use a drug that changes your consciousness without a sufficiently good reason (he offered a medical reason as an example).

BTW, Marijuana was initially made illegal because of racism and because of DuPont. Congressmen, who didn’t know what Marijuana was, were told that Marijuana was what caused Mexicans to be crazy.

drugwarrant.com/articles/why-is-marijuana-illegal/
causecast.org/news_items/8878-why-they-call-it-marijuana-racism-and-the-war-on-drugs
godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message974178/pg1

 

[LauraDymphna]

Here’s the issue if you live in the US, as the Church would say it. Marijuana is not an addictive substance, and it has its medical uses, and uses for pleasure, much as alcohol and tobacco does. However, depending on where you live, you need to follow the laws. “Render unto Caeser that which is Caeser’s” I believe this does not just apply to taxes but all things. also “when in Rome do as the Romans” so from a standpoint of Sacred Scripture, medicinal uses of THC and Pot are legal in most states including mine, a couple states have grow your own laws, and several local counties tend to overlook small amounts of it, for personal use. This DOES NOT, mean it is legal. Obey the authorities on all means, unless it is asking you to do something immoral. Ordering a person not to smoke pot is not immoral, just an annoyance for some

 

[BobObob]

Obey the authorities on all means, unless it is asking you to do something immoral. Ordering a person not to smoke pot is not immoral, just an annoyance for some

I’d say that if someone has an illness for which they need marijuana for (to deal with pain, appetite, or other things), and it is impossible or extremely impractical for them to get treatment otherwise, the civil law may be morally broken. This is because in that situation such a person would have a right to have and use the marijuana, and the government would not have the right to deny that person marijuana (only the civil power).

 

[LauraDymphna]

Umm… you really need to read Holy Scripture and the Catechism and Not be a cafeteria Catholic in this. The law of the land is the law of the land. There are other legal herbal remedies such as chamomile, goji juice, peppermint, and pain relievers, which do the same as marijuana. Pot is not a necessity for most people and when it is there are legal means of obtaining it

 

[BobObob]

Umm… you really need to read Holy Scripture and the Catechism and Not be a cafeteria Catholic in this. The law of the land is the law of the land. There are other legal herbal remedies such as chamomile, goji juice, peppermint, and pain relievers, which do the same as marijuana. Pot is not a necessity for most people and when it is there are legal means of obtaining it

I’m not sure if you’re talking specifically to me, but I do not pick and choose which authoritative teachings of the Catholic Church I wish to hold, and which ones I don’t. I’m a theology major who just finished my junior year at a Catholic college that prides itself in orthodoxy. I’m say this because otherwise you may not take me seriously.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church is a document written by JPII, that is a summary of previous authoritative Church teachings to inform people of what the Church teaches, rather than being an ex cathedra document. The words of the CCC itself do not fall under papal infallibility, but the previous Church teachings that it is often based on may be infallible.

Scripture and the Catechism both affirm that people need to obey legitimate laws of legitimate governments (CCC 2234). Although the CCC says that refusing obedience to the government is necessary when obeying would be “contrary to the demand of moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or to the teachings of the gospels” (CCC 2242), and it says armed resistance may potentially be moral (CCC 2243), they are not always perfectly clear under which conditions civil laws may morally be broken (they are not absolutely all-inclusive about every scenario).

If indeed using a particular substance is the only possible or reasonably practical effective way of obtaining relief of a medical ailment, or the extreme discomfort from that ailment, then to deny that person of that substance would be an offense against the fundamental rights of that person. This is why hospitals MUST treat a patient who really needs to be treated, regardless of whether or not he can pay. If the government denies a person the right to have such a needed substance, that government is violating its obligation to respect the fundamental rights of the human person (CCC 2237), and one of the conditions for morally breaking the civil law is met (CCC 2242).

I’m not an expert by any means when it comes to medicine, but I do know that doctors in California (where the medical use of marijuana is legal by state law) put their careers on the line and risk getting in trouble with the federal government by prescribing marijuana to patients. I’m guessing that these doctors wouldn’t take these risks if they didn’t think alternative drugs would suffice.

I believe the use of marijuana goes beyond the treatment (in terms of what it treats and its effectiveness) goes beyond the alternatives you mentioned (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_cannabis#Partial_list_of_clinical_applications ). However, like I said, I’m no expert in the medical field and I’ll defer to anything that scientific research conclusively shows in this regard.

 

[DavidJoseph]

I haven’t looked at every post in this thread, but from what I’ve seen, it doesn’t look to me like anyone brought up this previous question in the Q&A forum:

Question from dougm:
Is it a mortal sin to use marijuana casually (once or twice a year)?

Answer from Michelle Arnold:
Drugs may only be taken for genuine therapeutic purposes. When taken for recreational purposes, which is implied by the qualifier casually, it constitutes grave matter:

 Quote:
                                             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 cooperation in evil, since  they encourage people to practices gravely contrary to the moral law ([**CCC  2291**](http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2291.htm)).

For there to be mortal sin, there must also be full knowledge and full and free consent to the grave action.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=15353

 

[BobObob]

I haven’t looked at every post in this thread, but from what I’ve seen, it doesn’t look to me like anyone brought up this previous question in the Q&A forum:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=15353

From one of my previous posts (post 183):

One needs to remember that the Catechism of the Catholic Church is not, strictly speaking, an infallible text. The CCC is kind of a compilation of the Church teachings in a generally easy to find and easy to find format. It is (mostly) based off of previous Church teachings, and thus many of the things in there are authoritative.

When my Christian Moral Principles professor at my Catholic college was covering the Church’s position on the use of (recreational) drugs, he basically explained it like this: You may not use a drug that changes your consciousness without a sufficiently good reason (he offered a medical reason as an example).

This seems to be along the lines of the answer given in the Q&A forum.

I would say that what is meant by “drugs” does need to be better defined. I’d say that CCC 2291 by “drugs” is referring to any substance which alters one’s consciousness.

 

[valient_Lucy]

Well, sloth is one of the seven deadly sins, so marijuana use could be considered an occasion to sin.

 

[LauraDymphna]

to BobObob,
I have Studied The Catechism, it was NOT written by Pope John Paul II, However it is the Official Teaching of the Catholic Church, from the Latin Vulgate. The Imprimatur issued by Joseph Ratzinger (Benedict XVI) Lest we forget, The Church is not a Democracy. The Catechism is the Official Teaching of the Faith and Morals of the Church. The declaration, of the Pope’s Infallibility, is as follows: when he speaks ex Cathedra or on Faith and Morals if the Imprimatur, Nihil Obhistat, and/or Imprimi Post is issued on a Document, the document is free of Doctrinal Error. I suggest you review this concept. As to pick and choose, this is a cafeteria Catholic. Be one or the Other but do not sit on the Fence. Obedience is necessary in all things. You are obliged to believe all Public Revelation, not private. So this Means you are obliged to Believe the Marian Dogma’s but not in the Apparitions. You are Obliged to Believe in Transubstantiation, You are obliged to believe in the Life of our Lord Jesus, and you are Obliged to Believe in the Holy Scriptures, which specifically forbid Pharmocopia (greek-altered substance) See the Pauline letters and the laws of the Torah. And you are obliged to Do as Jesus Commanded, which is to obey the laws of the country you live in. If my country forbids Marijuana usage, except for medical reasons, then I am not allowed to smoke it. further more, the Holy Scriptures, and The Church finds no sufficient reason for me to smoke it, I am under a Higher Authority. There are reasons not to alter the mind chemically. Please take time to re-read your theological ideas. Take it to a priest or bishop, and ask for answers. The Church’s Truths are not up for debate.