FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums
Why claim that smoking is not a sin? - Printable Version

+- FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Church (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Forum: Catholicism (https://www.fisheaters.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: Why claim that smoking is not a sin? (/showthread.php?tid=42231)

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28


Re: Why claim that smoking is not a sin? - Nic - 02-16-2011

(02-15-2011, 09:33 PM)devotedknuckles Wrote: Jayne and nic recieve and give  blows like a happy married couple
tir for tat tag your it
will nic rise t the challange and finish her once and for all?

I and several others have tried delivering more than one telling blow of traditionalism, but her necromantic neo-con spirit simply will not stay down.  :laughing:


Re: Why claim that smoking is not a sin? - CaoimhinPConnell - 02-16-2011

Hello Jane –

As a scientist involved in health related issues, it’s my opinion you are making a false assumption.  Your assumption, without context is “Smoking is harmful.”  When in fact, more accurately, the position reflected in reality is “smoking may be harmful.” 

Smoking, like eating raw shellfish, or consuming alcohol or coffee, is harmful when abused or when done to excess.  The individual who has the occasional cigarette, cigar, or pipe is doing themselves no demonstrable harm.

If one is smoking 20 fags per day in a small house with an infant, then the second hand smoke is an issue.  However, to then take that to the extreme (and unsupported) conclusion that “Second hand smoke is (always) harmful” is patently absurd.

So it is not just the act (smoking or drinking) that dictates the harm, but rather the act in context of the manner of taking.

So, is smoking harmful? - Is drinking coffee harmful?  - Is eating chocolate harmful?  Could be… could be… the dose makes the poison.

Cheers!
Caoimhín P. Connell
Forensic Industrial Hygienist
www.forensic-applications.com

(The opinions expressed here are exclusively my personal opinions and do not necessarily reflect my professional opinion, opinion of my employer, agency, peers, or professional affiliates.  The above post is for information only and does not reflect professional advice and is not intended to supercede the professional advice of others.)

AMDG



Re: Why claim that smoking is not a sin? - jovan66102 - 02-16-2011

(02-15-2011, 09:15 PM)Nic Wrote: So which one's true then, Jayne - John Paul's Catechism or the Catechism of Trent, or the Catechism of St. Pius X, or the Baltimore Catechism - because John Paul's Modernist catechism has glaring differences with each of those, yet the latter three are all in accord with each other.  So, you see, one declares Catholicism mixed with the new religion, and the others claim just Catholicism.  John Paul II claimed Catholicism mixed with the new religion, and Pope St. Pius X claimed just Catholicism.  Jayne claims Catholicism mixed with the new religion (waving both flags) - and Nic claims just Catholicism (waving one flag).

Nic, have you read, 'TO HIS HOLINESS POPE JOHN PAUL II, BOOK OF ACCUSATION FOR HERESY against the Author of the supposed CATECHISM OF HE CATHOLIC CHURCH, a catechism of pride, a catechesis of deceit by THE ABBÉ GEORGES DE NANTES'? Eye opening!

Available here:

http://www.crc-internet.org/lib3.htm




Re: Why claim that smoking is not a sin? - JacafamalaRedux - 02-16-2011

Oh my gracious, is this thread still kickin?!?!?  :laughing: I can't bleeve you all haven't given up yet. Stubborn. Has anyone changed their original stance?


Re: Why claim that smoking is not a sin? - JayneK - 02-16-2011

(02-15-2011, 11:39 PM)Jitpring Wrote:
(02-15-2011, 10:20 PM)JayneK Wrote: That's a good example of what I mean about it not being clear.  When you look at 841 by itself it almost sounds like it says that Muslims are saved.  The following paragraphs explain that God wills all of humanity to be in the Church and the Church is where salvation is, but it is a really confusing way to phrase things.

Yes. Such studied ambiguity was an essential feature of Vatican II, and it was subsequently incorporated into its catechism. Of possible interest, an article from 1965: .

Exactly.  The Catechism has this problem because it echos the Council.  I know of one section of the CCC that has been revised since it was first published and I'm hoping that this will happen to more parts.  Just like the Council, the Catechism is in need of clarification.  Thanks for great collection of articles on this problem.  I just skimmed over them but I hope to read them more carefully when I have more time.


Re: Why claim that smoking is not a sin? - JayneK - 02-16-2011

(02-16-2011, 08:46 AM)CaoimhinPConnell Wrote: Hello Jane –

As a scientist involved in health related issues, it’s my opinion you are making a false assumption.  Your assumption, without context is “Smoking is harmful.”  When in fact, more accurately, the position reflected in reality is “smoking may be harmful.” 

You are right.  I have been blurring the distinction between harmful and potentially harmful and it is significant for this question.  People are not directly harming themselves by smoking; they are risking harming themselves.  So one of factors in evaluating the moral status of the act of smoking is the person's ability to assess long-term risk.  I gather that most people take up smoking when they are under 25 when the physiological development of the brain is not complete, specifically the part responsible for this ability.  This could mean that something comparable to invincible ignorance is in play. 

There seems to be quite a few factors that would influence whether or not any given person smoking is committing a sin, not just the amount and frequency.  It turns out to be a pretty complex question.  I think it would be a mistake to make a blanket statement that smoking is a sin.  This is too easily misunderstood as saying that smoking is intrinsically sinful  and that is not true.  But I think it is just as wrong to make a blanket statement that smoking is not a sin.  It seems likely that some people who smoke are sinning by doing so and making a blanket statement that is not a sin will discourage them from examining their conscience in this regard.  It would be better to say that smoking may be a sin under some circumstances.  This may encourage people to think about what they are doing.





Re: Why claim that smoking is not a sin? - JayneK - 02-16-2011

(02-16-2011, 03:06 PM)Jacafamala Wrote: Oh my gracious, is this thread still kickin?!?!?  :laughing: I can't bleeve you all haven't given up yet. Stubborn. Has anyone changed their original stance?

I have.  I started out thinking that many, possibly most, people who smoke are sinning.  I now think that it is too complex a question to estimate what proportion of smokers do so sinfully.  There are too many factors involved.


Re: Why claim that smoking is not a sin? - Bakuryokuso - 02-16-2011

i've learnt the true stance of the church which is a relief because I was surprised by trad smokers at a new years party last month. Not always a sin but not always not a sin either.

Michael Davies uses Abbe de Nantes as a source in Pope John's council but thinks he goes a bit too far in blasting Pope Paul VI


Re: Why claim that smoking is not a sin? - Nic - 02-16-2011

(02-16-2011, 06:37 PM)JayneK Wrote:
(02-16-2011, 03:06 PM)Jacafamala Wrote: Oh my gracious, is this thread still kickin?!?!?  :laughing: I can't bleeve you all haven't given up yet. Stubborn. Has anyone changed their original stance?

I have.  I started out thinking that many, possibly most, people who smoke are sinning.  I now think that it is too complex a question to estimate what proportion of smokers do so sinfully.  There are too many factors involved.

Indeed, but I would still say that everyday smokers are not sinning, but there is a matter of culpability at play.  Nearly everything that a person does in this modern world can be seen as harmful to one's body.  If we declare smoking a sin, then we must declare MANY other things a sin as well, from eating red meat to working in polluted environs to taking Ibuprofen for a headache (since NSAIDs are terrible on your liver).  In the meantime, I'll just keep puffin' on my Marlboros until I know that it is the proper time in my life to give up the habit.


Re: Why claim that smoking is not a sin? - jovan66102 - 02-17-2011

(02-16-2011, 10:10 PM)Nic Wrote: I'll just keep puffin' on my Marlboros.....

Oh, I think a case could be made that smoking Marlboros is a sin. :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: Camel straights forever!!