Drunkeness

[Paladin D]

Drunkeness is classified as a mortal sin; mainly because, the person lacks the ability to make clear moral judgements and is not in the right state of mind, thus endangering those around him/her. However, I have a hypothetical question:

If an individual who was new to drinking ordered their first alcoholic beverage, not having any intention of getting drunk, nor knowing how he/she will react, got "slammed" on their first drink, does that mean this person still committed a mortal sin?

I'm quite curious about this myself, and I'm interested in your thoughts. Considering this individual did not drink before, nor did he or she have the intention to get drunk. Though most people who get drunk do so either intentionally, or they slowly feel the effects as they continue guzzling one alcoholic beverage after another; but this doesn't exclude the fact that there are some who don't know what hit them.


[b]Note:[/b] This individual is not me, or anyone else I know. Just for those who are curious.

[Lounge Daddy]

would that situation be a life lesson?
a sort of "ah, now i know not to do that again" type situation?

some things in life are all about learning yer limits

i am looking forward to the other opinions on this thread

[Era Might]

To commit a mortal sin, you must have full knowledge and complete consent.

[Mercy me]

[quote name='Paladin D' post='1126542' date='Nov 23 2006, 12:24 AM']
Drunkeness is classified as a mortal sin; mainly because, the person lacks the ability to make clear moral judgements and is not in the right state of mind, thus endangering those around him/her. [/quote]

Is that the reason that it is a mortal sin? To me it seems that drunkeness is gluttony, one of the seven deadlies. The effects stem from the original gluttony or shall we say lack of temporance.

[jswranch]

[quote name='Paladin D' post='1126542' date='Nov 22 2006, 10:24 PM']
Drunkeness is classified as a mortal sin; [/quote]

My understanding nothing is classified as a mortal sin, but many things are 'grave matters'.

[Thy Geekdom Come]

[quote name='jswranch' post='1126587' date='Nov 23 2006, 01:39 AM']
My understanding nothing is classified as a mortal sin, but many things are 'grave matters'.
[/quote]
We can say things are objectively mortal sin, but not necessarily subjectively (since the objective nature assumes certain subjective conditions, namely full knowledge and free consent).

Anyway, no, it is not a sin to get drunk accidentally without meaning to while trying to exercise caution in the first place. I've had my fair share of drinks and over the summer, I accidentally had a beer without stopping to realize that I hadn't eaten in eight hours...I was stumbling all over the place, but it was an honest mistake (for the record, as soon as I noticed something funny was going on, I made sure I got a grip of myself and made sure I did what I was doing carefully and sat down as soon as possible).

[jswranch]

So when does a few beers turn into drunkeness?

[skrybe]

Noah was a famous drunk in the bible...God called him the only righteous man on earth prior to the flood.

Jesus turned water to wine....after all the other wine at the party had been consumed. Its fairly safe to say that everyone was drunk and jesus made MORE wine.

Drunkedness is a social norm. Not a religious tenent. Over the years many social norms have been embedded into our religious beliefs that werent initially present. Ever wonder why profanity is considered a sin even though the bible nor christ ever defined what profanity is? Its because profanity is a social norm attributed to religion over the years. English nor profanity existed in aramaic...

neither did breathalyzers.

[CatholicCid]

[quote name='skrybe' post='1126610' date='Nov 23 2006, 03:23 AM']
Noah was a famous drunk in the bible...God called him the only righteous man on earth prior to the flood.

Jesus turned water to wine....after all the other wine at the party had been consumed. Its fairly safe to say that everyone was drunk and jesus made MORE wine.

Drunkedness is a social norm. Not a religious tenent. Over the years many social norms have been embedded into our religious beliefs that werent initially present. Ever wonder why profanity is considered a sin even though the bible nor christ ever defined what profanity is? Its because profanity is a social norm attributed to religion over the years. English nor profanity existed in aramaic...

neither did breathalyzers.
[/quote]

I would disagree with you overall... Noah was mentioned as drunken once... And then, to what extent was he drunk? Did he intend to be drunk? Scripture does not clarify on this as it was not the main point of the passage I suppose.
Even then, he is mentioned once as drunk, so I would not generalize that as he was drunk most of the time (I get that impression from "famous drunk")

As for Cana, why should we assume everyone was drunk? And that Jesus made even more wine? Maybe there was a lot of people at the wedding (I've heard they were large affairs) and they ran out of wine before everyone had been served. Even if we look at Scripture, it mentions that the worst wine should be served after everyone has had plenty... Even from that we cannot assume drunkeness.
I'd just take a stab and say tolerance for such drinks as wine back then were quite higher than ours.

As for drunkeness being a social norm... I assumed the laws against public drunkeness, ect... were against such things...

As for profanity, I would consider that more a vulgar choice of words then a sin, at most it's the intent behind the use of language that people might call sinful.


If someone does not hold the intent to become drunk and is lacking in the knowledge of such matters, then I don't see how they could be culpable of a serious sin. Bad decision making, maybe. I'd say take your time, sip slowly, and try to stop when you start to feel all warm and fuzzy... If the bunnies are telling you to continue drinking, ignore them.

Edited November 23, 2006 by CatholicCid

[Balthazor]

You know when you are drunk. Trust me, you know.

[cathoholic_anonymous]

Wilful drunkenness is not a 'social norm'.

* It is gluttony, which involves irresponsibility, selfishness, and sheer wasteful behaviour.

* It causes people to behave in antisocial and unChristian ways. People can get loud, abusive, and even violent when they're drunk. Sometimes I'm scared to leave our student chaplaincy on Friday and Saturday night, if we've been having a study group or a social event in there - there is a pub close by and it can get very rowdy. One girl had verbal abuse hurled at her by a drunken stranger as she was leaving. Once (in a different place) I slipped in a pool of vomit. Anyone who deliberately goes out to get drunk, knowing that their behaviour could turn nasty at worst and that they could end up decorating the pavements with the contents of their stomach at best, is not acting in a Christ-like fashion.

* A recent British study has discovered that the so-called 'date rape drug' (Rophynol) is much less used than previously thought. Rapists usually prey on women who are simply drunk, rather than drugging them first. Drinking to excess diminishes your sense of awareness and places you at risk of being abused. Does this mean that rape is the fault of the victim? No, of course not - any more than it is your fault if another driver quite deliberately slams into your car. But you could improve your chances by not drinking too much in the first instance and wearing a seatbelt in the latter.

* Drunkenness causes you to lose your God-given free will. You can no longer make decisions in a rational manner if you've taken too much.

[Resurrexi]

Noe was the first man to ever have wine: he did not know its streignth.

Edited November 23, 2006 by StThomasMore

[Paladin D]

Makes sense, thanks for the responses guys.

[zeyeon]

If you can handle it...There is nothing wrong with having a few drinks every now and then. When the Pharasies got upset with Jesus for eating pork, he said... "It's not what goes into the body, it's what comes out"

As long as you're not comprimising your walk then you're fine.

Proverbs 31 4-7

31:4 It is not for kings, O Lemuel, it is not for kings to drink wine; nor for princes strong drink:
31:5 Lest they drink, and forget the law, and pervert the judgment of any of the afflicted.
31:6 Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish, and wine unto those that be of heavy hearts.
31:7 Let him drink, and forget his poverty, and remember his misery no more.

31:5 specifically states what I just said. Some people can't handle it, therefore they shouldn't drink. It's a case by case situation.

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='zeyeon' post='1127181' date='Nov 24 2006, 07:43 PM']If you can handle it...There is nothing wrong with having a few drinks every now and then.[/quote]Could you expain the "if you can handle it" comment? Reading this, I get the impression that you think that the Catholic Church has an absolute prohibition against alcohol. This isn't the case.

[zeyeon]

[quote name='Mateo el Feo' post='1127182' date='Nov 24 2006, 07:48 PM']
Could you expain the "if you can handle it" comment? Reading this, I get the impression that you think that the Catholic Church has an absolute prohibition against alcohol. This isn't the case.
[/quote]

It has nothing to do with the catholic church... it has everything to do with the starter of this thread stating that drunkenness is considered a mortal sin.

When you're an alchoholic that constantly uses alchohol to satisfy the urges of the flesh... then i guess that would fall under lust. But when you're drinking with someone in order to bring down thier walls and speak what's really on thier heart... then I don't see what's wrong with it. As long as you don't over do it and get stupified... and even if you get stupified... if you are still responsible and in control then that means you can handle it.

Edited November 25, 2006 by zeyeon

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='zeyeon' post='1127186' date='Nov 24 2006, 07:59 PM']It has nothing to do with the catholic church... it has everything to do with the starter of this thread stating that drunkenness is considered a mortal sin.[/quote]Considering that we are Catholic, I believe that Our Church's teachings [i]do[/i] matter to the discussion.

[quote name='zeyeon' post='1127186' date='Nov 24 2006, 07:59 PM']When you're an alchoholic that constantly uses alchohol to satisfy the urges of the flesh... then i guess that would fall under lust. But when you're drinking with someone in order to bring down thier walls and speak what's really on thier heart... then I don't see what's wrong with it.[/quote]Umm...you need to drink to the point of drunkenness in order to tell the truth of your heart? Remember, the thread is about "drunkenness" specifically, not alcohol intake in general.

[quote name='zeyeon' post='1127186' date='Nov 24 2006, 07:59 PM']As long as you don't over do it and get stupified... and even if you get stupified... if you are still responsible and in control then that means you can handle it.[/quote]So, substitute "stupefied" with "drunk", and it sounds like you're saying the exact same thing that we Catholics are. Note: stupefied and drunk are shown as synonymns in the thesaurus.

[zeyeon]

[quote name='Mateo el Feo' post='1127195' date='Nov 24 2006, 08:23 PM']
Considering that we are Catholic, I believe that Our Church's teachings [i]do[/i] matter to the discussion.

Umm...you need to drink to the point of drunkenness in order to tell the truth of your heart? Remember, the thread is about "drunkenness" specifically, not alcohol intake in general.

So, substitute "stupefied" with "drunk", and it sounds like you're saying the exact same thing that we Catholics are. Note: stupefied and drunk are shown as synonymns in the thesaurus.
[/quote]

lol I have come to the conclusion that you just like debating me.

I think you're just upset that we actually agree on something for once.

I honestly could care less what your church's standpoint is. The thread starter said it was considered a mortal sin. The 7 mortal sins do not include drunkeness, although drunkenness is a form of lust if you let it get to a certain point. If your church feels the same way that I do then Grrrrreat. Stop trying to paint me as a cahtolic hater lol.

[Mateo el Feo]

[quote name='zeyeon' post='1127203' date='Nov 24 2006, 08:47 PM']lol I have come to the conclusion that you just like debating me. [/quote]Of couse it's fun!

[quote name='zeyeon' post='1127203' date='Nov 24 2006, 08:47 PM']I think you're just upset that we actually agree on something for once.[/quote]Well, I don't think you've been here long enough to be branded as a "contrarian-at-all-costs," if that makes sense. I think it's good to acknowledge points of agreement, when possible.


[quote name='zeyeon' post='1127203' date='Nov 24 2006, 08:47 PM']I honestly could care less what your church's standpoint is. The thread starter said it was considered a mortal sin. The 7 mortal sins do not include drunkeness, although drunkenness is a form of lust if you let it get to a certain point.[/quote]Seven Capital Sins or seven Deadly Sins...not seven mortal sins.

Anyway, drunkenness falls under the sin of gluttony ([url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06590a.htm"]link[/url]), which is one of the seven.

[quote name='zeyeon' post='1127203' date='Nov 24 2006, 08:47 PM']If your church feels the same way that I do then Grrrrreat. Stop trying to paint me as a cahtolic hater lol.[/quote]I didn't mean to paint you as a "hater." I just wanted to clarify the Catholic perspective, which is the subject of the thread. Note: the questioner asked if drunkenness was a [i]mortal sin[/i], which is a term that few non-Catholics even use.

[Socrates]

[quote name='zeyeon' post='1127203' date='Nov 24 2006, 08:47 PM']
lol I have come to the conclusion that you just like debating me.

I think you're just upset that we actually agree on something for once.

I honestly could care less what your church's standpoint is. The thread starter said it was considered a mortal sin. The 7 mortal sins do not include drunkeness, although drunkenness is a form of lust if you let it get to a certain point. If your church feels the same way that I do then Grrrrreat. Stop trying to paint me as a cahtolic hater lol.
[/quote]
And we could care less what your personal standpoint is.

And you're confusing the seven Capital (or Deadly) Sins with mortal sins. They are two different concepts. The Capital Sins (Pride, Wrath, Lust, Envy, Avarice, Gluttony, and Sloth) are the "root sins" from which all actual individual sins come. Mortal sins are those serious sins, as opposed to lesser venial sins.

(And drunkeness falls under the sin of gluttony - overindulgence in food or drink.)

But since you obviously don't know nor care what the Catholic Church says, I don't see why you feel compelled to speak out on this at all.

Remember, better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open it and have everyone know with certainty.

I don't think anyone has to "paint" you as anything. You do a fine job of painting yourself as an ignorant troll without anyone's help!

[quote name='skrybe' post='1126610' date='Nov 23 2006, 03:23 AM']
Noah was a famous drunk in the bible...God called him the only righteous man on earth prior to the flood.

Jesus turned water to wine....after all the other wine at the party had been consumed. Its fairly safe to say that everyone was drunk and jesus made MORE wine.

Drunkedness is a social norm. Not a religious tenent. Over the years many social norms have been embedded into our religious beliefs that werent initially present. Ever wonder why profanity is considered a sin even though the bible nor christ ever defined what profanity is? Its because profanity is a social norm attributed to religion over the years. English nor profanity existed in aramaic...

neither did breathalyzers.
[/quote]
It doesn't say God approved of Noah's drunkenness, does it?

As for profanity, look no further than the Second Commandment: Thou Shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in Vain.

Thus using the name of God or speaking of sacred matters casually or disrespectfully is a sin against the Lord (whether it is "socially acceptable" or not).

Edited November 25, 2006 by Socrates