Posted on 06/10/2013 2:44:17 PM PDT by markomalley
Lighting up pot has its moral pitfalls.
The dawning of legalized marijuana across the states in recent years has prompted Church experts to try to clear the haze about the much-debated drug.
Since last November’s elections, Colorado and Washington passed unprecedented laws making legal recreational use of marijuana, and lawmakers and state boards are formulating ways to shift it from a black market to a regulated and taxed commercial enterprise. Medical use alone has passed in 18 states from Alaska and Arizona to Delaware and Vermont.
These laws contradict federal law, but states are not obligated to enforce federal regulations on personal consumption. In addition, President Barack Obama has stated that prosecution of marijuana users in the two states will be a low priority for the U.S. Department of Justice.
Often, those with a moral conscience rejected pot use because it’s against the law.
In the wake of pot’s decriminalization and growing acceptance...
(snip)
After considering the effects of marijuana use, moral theologians said a user’s intention is crucial to determining its morality. Cannabis is not intrinsically evil, so an analysis of the morality of smoking pot is found by determining the object of the act of smoking, said Christian Brugger, a moral theologian and seminary professor in Colorado.
Recreational pot smokers use marijuana to induce themselves into a state of euphoria. So the object is to get “high” and to alter their consciousness.
Yet consciousness is needed to make choices, and to impair the human mind is to impair the ability to make choices, he said. Therefore, if a person is high, it’s more difficult for them to make good choices.
Sacred Scripture doesn’t address getting high, but it is filled with warnings about drunkenness.
“Scriptures are pretty harsh about it,” Brugger said.
(Excerpt) Read more at ncregister.com ...
“After considering the effects of marijuana use, moral theologians said a user’s intention is crucial to determining its morality.”
Ah, those moral theologians are a bunch of buzzkills. Last time I invite them over to a party!
how do they deal with cigarettes?
i get a “buzz” when i first started, but that disappeared after 1-2 weeks... then i promptly quit cold turkey.
Meh..
It used to grow on the side of the road.
It’s pretty benign.
If old folks use it to aid pain or Adults use it to unwind, I don’t think it is that big of a deal.
That said, Kids should not use it during formative years.
Of course it's morally wrong.
There is always the body is a temple aspect.
Then there is the aspect that God created it.
Ben Franklin always said God made Beer because he wants us to be happy.
It’s a dilly of a pickle of a problem for the theologian that smokes an occasional spliff to commune with God LOL
What is the intend of Alcohol?
Medicinal purposes?
When is the church going to decide on something important...like denying communion to politicians who support the murder of the unborn.
When are they going to get serious about something serious?
“There’s more to alcoholic drinks than getting high”
I was mis-informed, then.
;)
Can you imagine the apostles having a toke to calm down on the evening of Good Friday? Or to celebrate the descent of the Holy Spirit? Just doesn't seem in keeping with Christian behavior IMHO.
Matthew... 15-11
If getting high is “morally wrong”, then so is smoking cigarettes, drinking alcohol and sex using the “natural method” of contraception, the one allowed by the Catholic church.
Dope Fiends need healing.
Many of the priests at my old catholic school smoked, so I'm guessing this is new.
Personally, I would get a different confessor.
To be a mortal sin, you must have three conditions:
* there are certain things, like murder, that are obvious matters of natural law where feigned ignorance is not an excuse, obviously.
So, is smoking tobacco objectively grave matter?
The Catechism mentions the word tobacco at only one place:
2290 The virtue of temperance disposes us to avoid every kind of excess: the abuse of food, alcohol, tobacco, or medicine. Those incur grave guilt who, by drunkenness or a love of speed, endanger their own and others' safety on the road, at sea, or in the air.
Doesn't say "grave matter," does it?
Maybe it says it is grave matter someplace else...
How about here:
Human maturity is an indispensable premise for a life of priestly chastity. Priests should have control of their affective life and, if necessary, should seek expert help, preferably from priests; they should have friendships with other priests and should be happy to live in common with them, avoiding isolation for too long a time; they should not expose themselves needlessly to danger; they should be moderate in their use of food, and especially in their use of alcohol and tobacco; they should be prudent in their reading, the shows they attend, their use of audiovisual media, and their choice of entertainment.
So why would they counsel priests to be "moderate in their use of … tobacco" if the use of tobacco was grave matter?
Now, even if the CCC said that it was grave matter (and, as I've shown you, it clearly doesn't), if you honestly were not aware of that, how could you have knowledge? How could you have consent?
Like I said, find a different confessor. This one is full of crap....making up his own little version of Catholicism.
Alcohol makes you belligerent and foolhardy, pot makes you chill and mellow. Guess which one war making societies approve of?
I guess smoking a pack a day at this stage of history when the consequences are so well defined could be construed as a sin, just as drinking two bottles of jack a day and destroying your liver could be. Whether it’s an ongoing mortal sin- well, it depends. Person actively fighting a recognised addiction but not yet sucessful: not much sin there. Uneducated person, lots going on on life, not really aware of what they’re doing to themselves: venial sin, at worst. Inveterate chain smoker, neglecting responsibilities to further their habit: now you’re into mortal sin territory. Cigar after dinner once every couple weeks, the odd cigarette or pipe here and there- you’re pretty safe on the sin front.
Scripture also does not address what the secular laws should be on this question. There was no drug or alcohol prohibition in the OT or NT. Nor was there any suggestion that there should be such laws. AFAIK, the Catholic Church has been silent on the matter of secular drug laws for the entirety of its existence.
So what is the biblical justification for prohibition laws?
Okay, I can follow your logic for the first two, but the last one makes absolutely no sense. There is nothing in the Bible to indicate that there is anything morally suspect about sex inside of marriage. The joy and the pleasure, even the euphoria, is a feature, not a bug. :-)
It bypasses the intended purpose of sex, which is reproduction. Abusing a body not ready for reproduction and doing so while knowing it, would be “morally wrong” by the same extension.
I’m not saying I agree with the above being morally wrong, but that it is an extension of the argument against the former two indulgences.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.