BOLD is Mark 7:9
I think we need to put aside some of the Puritanical and political aspects of marijuana use and focus on the PRINCIPLE of why either MJ or alcohol use would be sinful or wrong.
It has to do with the alteration of the faculties. When one gets to a point of losing control of one's higher faculties, the ability to reason, especially morally, one commits a grave sin by using the substance ... without sufficient reason. So, for instance, if you're in extreme pain, there's nothing sinful about getting "high" with morphine or some other such drug. So the only real differences, morally, between the two are 1) that you can get to that point a lot quicker with MJ than with alcohol ... and 2) possibly the legality. Let's say, however, that we're in a state where recreation use is legal.
An anecdote: I had never understood the attraction of narcotics. I had taken half of a Vicodin tablet after a wisdom tooth extraction and just had nightmares without any significant pain relief. When my appendix ruptured, they gave me morphine and I got itchy and groggy. THEN… when I had my cardiac bypass 5 years ago, I had an amusing insight. While I was still in the ICU with post-op pain I was passing a kidney stone. Serious pain from the surgery and the stone. They gave me an IV dose of Dilaudid (quite close chemically to heroin) and within about 10 seconds I was floating on clouds with angels playing harps, and zero pain. I then understood the attraction.
If one gets "tipsy" or slightly elated, then that could be a venial sin without sufficient reason. Sacred Scripture itself states that "wine brings joy to the heart of man". So even the induction of a bit of elation (what some would call "recreational" use has a place). Jone says that small amounts might be indulged in without sin for proportionate reason for things like relaxing the nerves.
Precisely so! "Titration" of dose makes it possible to avoid becoming sinful.
The Puritanical among us seem to condemn anything joyful
So there's a direct proportionality between the degree to which the higher faculties are effected and the justifying reason. Complete loss of the faculties requires a grave reason, whereas a very slight impairment of the faculties would require a lesser reason. And this could vary from individual to individual. Some people might retain total control overthemselves with a bit of win or even MJ, whereas others might lose control and put themselves into occasions of sin.
Exactly why I have emphasized risk/benefit analysis before embarking on use of MJ or alcohol.
I've never used MJ, so I wouldn't know whether it's possible to take a couple hits and just get a little tipsy while maintaining control of one's faculties, no different than if one indulged in a couple glasses of wine or beer. But assuming that's possible, I would see no moral reason for entirely avoiding it.
Precisely so.
MJ seems not to be addictive in the manner of opiates,…
Because MJ causes NO ADDICTION, the rabid enemies of MJ have tried to change the definition of "addiction."
Just as they changed the definition of "vaccine" to allow the COVID gene therapy to be called a vaccine.
…but variouis "addictive personalitles" should probably cautioned to avoid it, just as those prone to alcoholism need to avoid alcohol altogether even where it might be justified for someone without the problem.
Perfect. Rational!
Even the tiniest amount of addictive opiates for recreational reasons would be a serious sin due to the risk of becoming hooked (which happens often) and the absolutely destructive impacts it could have on one's life. I've also heard of people "micro-dosing" with MJ, where they barely feel any effect related to the impairment of their natural faculties.
Precisely so. The risks from "disinhibition" are manageable in NORMAL people. Ahem!
Politically and historically, the major reason that MJ was outlawed was because some of the earliest motor vehicles ran on hemp oil, so Big Oil had to get rid of the competition, and they launched a major campaign to demonize it.
Part of the demonization was to connect MJ use with blacks and Mexicans. Alcohol was the preferred drug of WASPs. Interestingly, America's first forays into "gun control" was also framed as a race issue.
Then there were Puritanical movements to outlaw alcohol durign the Prohibition era that of course failed.
Failed catastrophically.
So, in summary, I don't see any reason that medical use of MJ would be sinful provided that it does provide relief for various ailments, and that might even include people who suffer from anxiety or other ailments and who might benefit fromt the relaxation effects (again assuming they would use small amounts to the point necessary to alleviate their condition). Even a tiny amount could be justified for "recreational" use in the same way that it's OK to have a bit of wine or beer to lift one's spirits.
I'll add this. There is an enormous array of potencies. At the low end are the street weed of the '60s (3-5%THC/0.4%CBD) and today's "balanced" strains (e.g., "Harlequin" 8%THC/8%CBD). Stepping up the potency one can buy very potent leaf (e.g., "Durban Poison"
20%THC/0.1%CBD) and concentrates like trichome head cells, hashish, and Rick Simpson Oil (40-50%THC/scant CBD).
So, a single puff of a balanced strain may give relief of seizures, muscle spasms, nausea, or pain without any elation or sinful risk of disinhibition in a NORMAL person.
It may take more for relief and risk of disinhibition may increase. As you say, Lad, the individual must make their own assessment. in discussion with their confessor, as to whether or not the risk is acceptable.
Through the course of my advocacy, I have met 8 people who have beaten advanced or aggressive cancers (e.g., glioblastoma multiforme, "GBN") using "RSO" (Rick Simpson Oil). Every one of those 8 people did the same thing—an enormous dose of RSO daily for 60 days. Were they disinhibited? You bet.
Was it worth it? Or should they have died instead? I have NEVER met anyone who survived GBM for more than a couple of months using "standard of care" options. Yes, that is my anecdotal experience, but, exactly as I stated early in this dispute, anecdotal experience is useful for research leads—and evidence is accuмulating reading the benefits of cancer in treating cancer, not just treating the side-effects of "standard of care" cancer treatments.
Now, most of the above concerns the
medical use.
What about recreational use?
The same theological and physiological principles apply.
Dose can be regulated with alcohol (a sip of wine, an entire beer, a fifth of gin) and it can be regulated with MJ (a puff of Harlequin, a gummy of CBD, a joint of potent leaf, or a "dab" of vaped oil). Alcohol is inherently toxic (that's why it is used as an antiseptic). MJ is NOT inherently toxic. You can die from an alcohol overdose. You cannot die from a MJ overdose (unless you exclude oxygen!).
Are there prophylactic benefits to certain uses of alcohol? Yes. A daily glass of wine reduces cardiac risk in certain populations.
Are there prophylactic benefits to certain uses of MJ? Yes. Marijuana smokers have lower rates of cancer than NON-smokers.I advocate the appropriate use of medical MJ (not only for the sick, but also for prophylaxis) and have no opposition to the
prudent use of MJ in NORMAL people.
Topic: Marijuana use sinful for Catholics? (Read 53707 times)