The fact that the Catechism speaks of moderation when it speaks of tobacco use (as well as alcohol use) means that it's not intrinsically disordered. There can't be a moderate amount of murder or adultery because those things are disordered and thus always and everywhere wrong.
Genuine question from a seeking non-Catholic: Can this follow with marijuana? Clearly there is disorder with a wake-and-bake/high-all-day pot head, but for someone who likes a pipe of weed in the evening, is this permissible?
@oatmealtruck7811 I'm not an expert on the topic but it seems you're about right, marijuana in moderation would fall under a non intrinsically sinful activity and would be permissible.
@@oatmealtruck7811 Most likely not because it has a psychedelic effect. Nicotine has a calming effect, it doesn't carry the potential for hearing or seeing things. I'd say it's closer to comparing a wine glass of moonshine to a wine glass of wine.
@@walkermott1750 weed is not psychedelic though it can be very relaxing just like having a drink. But it can make you think a lot more, it could be used for good if you have ADHD like me it used to make me very focused on what i was doing or thinking. I don’t use it anymore because i don’t know what the church says yet, im a revert.
I’m 34 years old and have lived with progressive interstitial lung disease for the last 10 years. I only smoked a bit as a teenager so it’s probably not the cause but I can safely say that lung disease is NOT something you want to mess around with. I see no benefits to smoking.
Have you been tested for alpha 1 antitrypsin deficiency ? It’s a protease inhibitor and normally stops them breaking down proteins - but if you lack this then many enzymes that break down proteins are active - destroying your lungs. You’re quite young for international lung disease.
@@TheJmlew11There isn't much difference between pipe smoking and cigar smoking. Both are smoked for the aroma and flavor and neither are smoked for inhaling smoke into the lungs in order to get a buzz or fix. That being said Pope Benedict smoke cigarettes and several other Catholics including saints enjoyed all varieties of tobacco
I wouldn’t go so far as to say it’s intrinsically immoral, but I also think it’s likely that many people who tote the “moderation” line are actually exceeding it. I mean, even a daily cigar seems quite excessive. I also think having a glass of whiskey or fast food every evening is probably excessive.
@@Deuterocomical I agree. Honestly I don’t know anybody who smokes who isn’t an addict. I’ve met folks who can moderate alcohol, but I’ve never met anyone who smoked who could take it or leave it. You’re either smoking everyday (or more) or not at all. At least that’s my anecdotal experience.
Exactly. The issue lies in what is moderate for the individual. It will certainly vary a lot based on tons of factors. Knowing where to stop can be hard if one already has a habit of engaging in the near occasion of sin. It would be better to avoid such things even if they aren't intrinsically immoral if you have a bad history to go with it.
…you mean usually in response to a teetotaler who first insists that it’s wrong? I’ve seldom met anyone who, unprompted, begins to defend tobacco use… but if I had a dime for every person who’s gone out of their way to making remarks objecting to smoking and make me feel like I’m bad, I’d have enough cash to fund Thursday’s year-end bonus
I've literally never had someone come up to me and unprompted start defending cigar smoking....As a matter of fact, I've never had anyone unprompted just start talking cigars in general with me. What are you doing to get people to defend smoking to you?
It's not that complicated. Moderation is a virtue. Excess is a vice. This applies to smoking, drinking and all sorts of activities. There is simply no Biblical or theological basis for the prohibition of either one.
OP suggests *excess* smoking is a vice, if there were biblical grounds for complete prohibition we should post them. I personally don’t agree with smoking, because it’s a pathway to excess, but I also haven’t seen explicit prohibition in scripture.
I smoke cigars only on special occasions. When the sun comes up, when the sun goes down, when I hear a dog bark,etc.etc. I smoke about 15 cigars a day, and I inhale.
@@ozzy_au Well if what came out was sinful and it restricted you and made you less free then it was very good you made the decision to quit, is what I am saying.
@@erathor9120 In context. With that in mind Cigars defile your body and harm your cardiovascular system. It is number 1 reason for lung cancer. My brother in Christ, be honest to yourself
The issue is that there are few studies on the matter, and these studies are often univaried. There were big studies in the past which proved that the various forms of tobacco act differently. Also even if a studies concluded that there was no significant risk found then they still have to say that "smoking kills". (This has already happened.)
It's definitely not a virtue, but I wouldn't necessarily say it's sinful either. The church has never condemned smoking to my knowledge except Marijuana
@@thejcatholicIt has never condemned drinking wine either. And alcoholic is one thing and drinks alcohol for pleasure on occasion or what have you is not problematic. Yet even wine has suspected carcinogens. Onions have suspected carcinogens.
@@NickyMetropolis1313 Unfortunately, among most people, it's a lot easier to develop a nicotine addiction than a dependency on alcohol. Nicotine is a stimulant, and many smokers enjoy the feeling of being alert throughout the day. Alcohol is a depressant, and very few people want to feel drowsy throughout the day, particularly employed people. Consequently, more people become chain-smokers than alcoholics.
I am glad Trent recognizes the inconsistency problems involved with these extended natural law arguments. They seem to work fine for issues we don't need them for (like homosexual activity, rape, murder, etc.), but their use beyond named sins leads to problems when applied consistently.
-Mom and Grandmother both died from emphysema (from smoking); -Father had Buerger disease (smoking related), and had both legs from the knees down and several fingers amputated; -Grandfather had 14 heart attacks, the last one took his life (smoking and obesity related); -Aunt died of esophageal cancer (smoking and obesity related).
@@samuraibat1916 No idea how. He was ornery. He snuck out of the hospital room to smoke in the stairwell and got caught by my grandma! I was there for that. lol 😂
Alcohol, smoked meats, plastics, certain cosmetics, plenty of day-to-day things are carcinogenic. It may be unwise to willingly expose oneself to it, it can be imprudent, but sinful? I doubt it. Consequences don't define the morality of a behavior.
I usually find it unpersuasive to use scientific studies to bolster moral arguments. Is it immoral for me to spend more than 15 minutes in the sun during peak UV without slathering myself in SPF 50? Should I reject as immoral a diet heavy in red meat because “studies” tell me to prefer plants for my own health and for the environment? Besides, cigar smoking can contribute greatly to conviviality, which is great for the soul.
I largely agree with you but I do think that there's a clear difference between minor sunburns or eating red meat and smoking cigars/cigarettes in terms of overall health risks.
@@IntegralistRevival I have read studies proving 2 cigars a day have no negative health effects. I’ve read countless studies in the benefits of red meat (contra the mainstream narrative). Or what about sleep? Is it immoral for me to routinely sleep less than 7 hours a night, or fail to wear blue light blocking glasses begging 3 hours before bed? Besides, all these studies tend to implicitly reduce us to our bodies and don’t (can’t) take into consideration our hylomorphic makeup. For these and many more reasons I just find using scientific studies a good basis for moral judgments. God bless you brother. Now GO SMOKE A CIGAR. 😂😂
@@IntegralistRevivalNo there isn't because smoking one or two cigars per day is a minor risk. Just like getting too much sun is a minor risk overall. As I have said elsewhere the list of Saints who have smoked tobacco products of all sorts is very long. Smoking cigars for example generally relieves stress and helps in relaxation. Well the number one killer by far is heart disease from too much stress. There are increasing studies showing how sugar is bad for you. This means that every Christmas party when we eat sugar cookies or other variety we are engaging in a unhealthy behavior that can contribute to gluttony and also cause cancer and/or diabetes. These arguments against smoking really don't stick. Red wine has suspected carcinogens as do onions yes onions. None of these health arguments really stick the landing.
@@enderwiggen3638 you’re also seemingly assuming that I’m talking about smoking around others who want nothing to do with it when in fact in my experience that is never the case. We smoke in cigar shops or my patio, etc. I’m not lighting up on an airplane.
It is written, all things are permissible but not all things are beneficial, food for the stomach and stomach for food but I shall be a slave to neither.
Its true you can have " unhealthy" food in moderation as long as its offset with healthier choices, it will not do any damage to your genes or your general health.. problem is nicotene creates lifelong addicts so its not a matter of choice to eat something or not or willpowers or abstinence but a virtual compulsion fueled by changes in brain and body because of nicotene . its a poison and you by smoking are poisoning others around you who have no choice its a disgusting habit
@@TempleofChristMinistries what am i saying? Its not even here anymore... am I permitted an opinion on you tube land before it gets deleted by the op or admin, just for saying smoking is gross its the truth, most people dont see the end stages of smoking but i have its a travesty and disgusting habit, seems like on you tube land people can make up baloney and slander others but we got no right of reply back ...now even catholics are doing it..really bad
I mean couldnt you say that drinking soda is immoral because your mouth wasnt meant to drink flavored carbonated water with chemicals and you could get diabetes from drinking soda?
I don't think smoking is sinful per se. But it can become sinful if 1) you are making others uncomfortable with the smoke (Mt 5, 21-22 ; Romans 14,13 ; Gn 13,8) CCC 2284, 2) you put yourself at risk for addictive use (thou shalt not kill, CCC 2288) 3) you become attached to wordly things to the point you spend your money, time and heart in smoking (Dt 6,5 ; CCC 2405)
Almost everything can be sinful. Going to adoration when you should be doing something else like feeding your child or doing chores is sinful. Drinking water to the point where you know your body will get damaged is sinful.
When more people smoked the obesity epidemic was not nearly as bad as it was. Nobody's arguing that eating bread is immoral. The list of saints that smoked cigars pipes or cigarettes or used nasal snuff is very long
In boxing and ufc, one gains points by harming their opponent. The intrinsic goal is to harm the other person. In football the intrinsic goal is to get the ball into the end zone. Yes, tackling is part of the game but the goal is to stop the other team from advancing the ball when tackling not to inflict harm. Hurting your opponent is the fundamental goal of combat sports but the same is not true of football.
So defense in football is intrinsically evil? Describe a way that a a defender can stop a runningback running right at him that does inflict damage on him or the runningback. Is the runningback sinnning for running at such speed and power that he leaves the defender no choice but to harm him? And this goes for every sport. In running uou push your body right up to edge of breaking down during a race In gymnastics they stunt the growth of female gymnasts to make them better. I think women’s gymnasts is actually an immoral sport wjen they do that.
I disagree, the intrinsic goal isn't to harm your opponent but to outperform them, you can win a UFC match without causing any lasting harm to your opponent, although it's unlikely. Also, you're failing to take into account the individual goals of the positions in football. Your job as a lineman you could argue is intrinsically violent.
I wonder how you would defend drinking alcohol (a poison) along the lines of a general thought like Trent’s initial proposition. It’s clearly allowed in scripture, has negative health effects, etc
Sugar has negative health effects. It's a rabbit hole. The test ought to be whether your body actually utilizes it for anything positive (calories) or is it a pure vice. Even good and necessary things in excess are sinful (gluttony).
The thing is, nicotine also has benefits, not just harms. It can help with focus and cognitive functioning and cigars in particular can help with stress and making you more calm, so I dont think its as simple as Trent makes it out to be. In the end, its all about moderation and different nicotine products vary based on their harms
Are we really making the claim that boxing and UFC are sinful? So ridiculous. Martial arts teach young men the responsibility of being able to use violence, this is a fundamental issue in manhood. Just because something has risk doesn’t mean it’s sinful. The (male) human body was made for combat, higher brow ridges, thicker bones, faster reaction times and the weight distribution of a male body is optimized for warfare. Such things aren’t present when it comes to cigarettes or other smokables. Martial arts can be a good exercise as they’re mentally stimulating as well.
Yes! In the Age of Christendom, we had a strong tradition of combat competition between boys and between young men (even if some persons objected to some specific sports such as jousting) Combat sports are not novel modern inventions.
According to the Church, combat sports are not inherently evil, nor is watching them, but many Catholic theologians have discussed whether prize fighting is sinful. Something like the UFC itself could definitely be considered sinful, even if the combat sports used in it are not by design evil. Self Defense is good. Some wars are morally acceptable. Getting enjoyment from and betting on two people beating the crap out of each other walks a line that some theologians believe to be immoral. Are you enjoying the skill involved, or the violence? Are you training combat sports specifically to hurt people, or simply to be fit and be able to defend yourself? The intentions always matter. "Made for combat" doesn't necessitate being used for combat. We were "made for combat" in order to protect each other and hunt food, not to hurt each other.
@@holdintheaces7468 I agree that the intentions matter, I suppose the question is where does one draw the line. Is one glorifying violence when one eats a chicken wing? Arguably, more violence was done to enable that enjoyment than allowing to prize fighters to duke it out. Same argument for a salad as plants are also living things, not making an argument for veganism, just that I don’t see many people liking a sport merely because there’s violence involved, rather the violence heightens the need for skill and ability. Some individuals may like it for violence’s own sake but that is an issue between them and God and therefore I don’t believe that is cause enough to condemn the enjoyment of a combat sport.
There was a christian judo practitioner who was disciplined in the olympics for making a sign of the cross, should he not been a practitioner of said sport?
@@EUSA1776 Come now. Those aren't analogous situations at all and you know it. Don't take my argument personally. I wasn't saying you were sinful in enjoying them (I didn't even state that it's definitively sinful, merely pointed out that some theologians have argued it can be). But you have to admit that there are most definitely people out there that enjoy things like the UFC solely for the violence. If the violence didn't play a role, fencing would be more popular.
3:04 I think there's a difference between UFC and football in that UFC (and boxing) are geared toward causing injury, whereas football has it as a consequence. Combat sports which have as their object to cause injury are disordered, but football isn't ordered toward causing injury, and to do so can in fact cause one to be penalized while playing football. You win at boxing by causing harm, you can be ejected from football for intentionally causing harm.
Pipe smoking is medicinal to me. I don’t remember who it was but I heard about someone who was dealing with a lot of stress, had hypertension, etc. They began smoking a pipe to relax at the end of the day and the next time they went to the doctor their test results were much better. The doc said “I don’t know what you changed but keep it up.”
This was an interesting debate, but I feel like some key points were missing or downplayed, especially about the risks of cigar smoking. Matt Fradd seemed to brush over just how dangerous cigars are-there’s a clear link between cigar smoking and cancers of the palate, larynx, stomach, and bladder. Look at Sigmund Freud, who smoked cigars for years and eventually died from related health issues. The idea that cigars are somehow safer because they don’t have additives like cigarettes doesn’t change the fact that even “natural” substances can be really harmful when inhaled. One big issue that wasn’t really touched on is the impact smoking can have on others. Smoking around non-smokers forces them to inhale second-hand smoke, which is not only uncomfortable but also dangerous. As Catholics, we’re called to be mindful of the well-being of others, and smoking around people who didn’t choose to be exposed to it could be seen as selfish or inconsiderate. Also, I think comparing alcohol (wine, especially) to something like cannabis doesn’t quite fit. Wine was a staple in Jesus’ time, something essential for life and symbolic of joy-and of course, it plays a major role in the sacraments. Cannabis, while it may have medicinal uses, is mostly a recreational drug today, so the comparison feels off. I think the conversation could have benefited from a deeper look at the health risks and the moral responsibility to avoid harming others, especially when it comes to second-hand smoke.
I’m a Protestant but I have so much respect for the intentionality that Trent approaches subjects like this and wrestles with them for the sake of being more Christ-like. Fascinating discussion!
excess is the key to trent's argument. every regular smoker is basically doing it in excess even though society doesn't see it as such but once you smoke multiple times per day, it is an addiction and many smokers admit to it, and also submit to it. with drinking it is very different. most people who drink are not addicted as they only do it on special occasions or gatherings. tell a smoker to not smoke for a few days and they get headaches and then it's a noticable physical addiction.
I love a good cigar or smoking pipes. It’s not an addictive activity, it’s not giving you any high, it’s just an activity. Most cigar and pipe smokers are not dying sooner, because they don’t inhale. Also, many doctors say HPV viruses are more dangerous for mouth cancers. Look, my grandmother died at 99 after needing 10 years of help because dementia. Is that the way to go? Anyway, at the end of the day it is no one’s business other than God in relation to me. I know I’m a good man, so I don’t worry one bit about this.
People have been cooking over open fires like forever, that’s natural law. Smoke doesn’t matter because we’re all coming to a certain end anyway. Fear of that should worry you more.
All tobacco contains nicotine and nicotine is addictive. It is an addictive activity, and any addiction is a form of slavery. You can lie to yourself and claim it isn't addictive, but don't lie to other people. Also, people who cook over open fires die earlier than people who don't. Yes, we are all going to die, but dying not because of but with a disordered worldly attachment can affect the state you die in. And encouraging others to die in that state is something you don't want to do. It's the thing that it you should be afraid of.
He barely interrupted, and it was always to talk about something Trent just said. A conversation is a two way exchange, not a 20 minute monologue. This isn't a structured debate.
Thanks Matt and Trent, may I add a personal point, a close family member of mine smoked all her life (moderately, 20 cigarettes = 2days) and could not completely give them up due to anxiety and nervousness when trying to do so. Sometimes it may be virtually impossible to quit due to a persons disposition.
I smoked for years and I wasn’t going to church for years which I now regret . I kept praying to God to please help me stop smoking because I became a lector at church ⛪️ and I felt it was wrong to smoke and standing in the alter . God answered my prayer 🙏 after the 4th covid vaccine 💉 I have because allergic to alcohol, nicotine and cannabis which I was using for my fibromyalgia. I now thank God because I can stand on the alter clean and without vices but I’m also allergic to many meds that I need for my different medical conditions. I just say Jesus Christ help me 🙏 regarding the medical pills but I go forward with the help of God 🙏
That's weird. I've used cannabis for about 10 years I'm in my 60s. I think I'm getting allergic to it. It's hard to find cannabis where I live now, they have legal gummies. I really seem to be allergic to them. It gives me hives. I started smoking cigarettes and drinking about that time. I NEVER drink now but I'm done with cigarettes for sure. If I get the urge to smoke. I do a one hitter of tobacco. It seems to help. I'm so done with smoking, I don't care if it's sinful or not. It's a horrible habit I don't want!
@@Whereempathsgather all this happened after 4th covid vaccine. I didn’t know I had dormant urticaria and for 3 yrs it’s 24/7. I’m also allergic to any med that can help for the chronic urticaria. I finally found an allergist that found the problem because nobody knew for 2 years what was wrong and I have suffered a lot. There was only 1 option left of a monthly injection of Xiolar and last injection I almost passed out or dying because my breathing stopped for a few seconds and I started hearing things far away . Now I have to avoid the triggers such as sun, heat, spicy 🌶️ foods and can’t take a bath with hot water. It’s gotten better but not gone yet . It’s suppose to go back dormant eventually but when only God knows. It’s been hard. All those things activate the urticaria. I used cannabis for my fibromyalgia and worked very well but after a while I would break out in hives and itch all over . I had to change all the meds I was taking because would also activate my urticaria. I’m down to bare minimum and my fibromyalgia is strong . I just keep praying and having faith that it will go back dormant
@@soniatorres5227 I never took the jab.... They would have to hog tie me. They had me on antidepressants for 30 years. 5 attempts because the drugs worked against me. Cannabis help me 100%. If that's a sin, I'm a huge sinner and God will deal with me later. It's natural, people think it's like alcohol. Alcohol ruined my life! Lost a job because cannabis but it was fine for me to be a drunk, smh! I could go on and on!! I've been a Christian since I was 12 years old. A bunch of stiffed neck people I run in to. We are all sinners, get the log out of your own eye before you judge people. I'll pray for you! Don't eat sugar...one of the worse thing you can do, especially, forms of arthritis. Detox with lemons. I also use vinegar in a glass of ice water. It helps with stomach issues.🙏🙏🙏🙏 For you.
Stimulants and depressants both limit the fullness of consciousness. Those who argue that stimulants like nicotine bring the fullness of consciousness out are missing the fact that they essentially make one inpulsive and risk exposing you to vices of impulse more. They should be used with calculation like on a long car ride to safely stay awake or to treat extreme pain.
@InFideScientiam I suppose you impulsively smoke? Even then, that's a matter of discipline, which if you are incapable of doing, you should quit. Don't blame the cigar or cigarette for your inability to control yourself.
Moderation is key, if something like Alcoholic beverages, which are both purely recreational and carcinogenic are are allowed within moderation I fail to see any signifigant moral difference with cigars which are purely recreational and carcinogenic.
When it comes right down to it, if you "overthink" it, everything is sinful , especially when it is overly done. But when you sit and analyze and think and think , you fall into the vicious cycle . You can't even watch TV or videos much less RUclips without seeing a photo that is inappropriate ... so is opening our eyes to the world sinful ? Just depends how much you think about it .
"Yes, gluttony does apply to substance abuse. It's a destructive sin that can lead to addiction, decline in health & even death. The sin's impact on one’s will & life can manifest in behaviors such as substance abuse, making it relevant to the context of addiction & overindulgence" Fr. Robert Spitzer Magis Center
Yes but 95% of those studies come from an era where most of the population would brush their teeth like once a month. I imagine a modern study that separates the different forms would have a wildly different results
Going down this rabbit hole is stupid because of the points made at 5:15 with chemicals in foods. If smoking cigars is immoral (which nicotine has been proven to have many positive neurological benefits) than so is obesity and being overweight because that isn’t natural to the human condition. And by Trent’s logic only inhaling smoke is immoral and since tobacco is a plant it’s totally acceptable to chew it
@@CarDevourer 30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength. 31 The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself. There is no commandment greater than these.” All else is rumor isn’t it? Just be a good man, do as well as you can, but let’s not act as fools by going over silly details.
I will counter Trent in that I don't think he understands why many people smoke. (particular response to him saying he doesn't know of any good that comes from it) Im in the military, and I smoke small cigars on an infrequent basis, maybe two times a week at most, and I only do so for the simple reason that Nicotine both calms and focuses me. It also provides a social activity that is sadly becoming less common these days. Compared to other people I work with, my intake is pretty low, with some of my fellows needing nicotine just to get through the day. So in this case one could argue that the sinfulness of nicotine usage is in its excess. I would be inclined to agree with this, so long as there is no hypocrisy and we treat other substances the same. (alcohol as the primary example) But more often than not the people I see who complain the most about its usage have no qualms about people having a drink on the weekend. I guess If I had a final thought it would be; Why do people suddenly care so strongly about this? I've seen many good Catholics who smoked a pipe or cigars and it never occurred to me as being some sort of vice. What's with the sudden teetotaler attitude, are we Catholics or American evangelicals?
This was a fascinating discussion, and I appreciate the thoughtfulness both of you brought to it. I’d like to share some reflections on the morality of smoking cigars, as well as other substances like alcohol and cannabis, from a Catholic perspective. The concern about natural law and tobacco use is valid-our bodies are not "designed" to process harmful substances like nicotine or inhaled smoke. However, Catholic moral theology considers not just the nature of our bodily faculties but also intention, context, and proportionality. Occasional, moderate cigar use might be justifiable as a recreational activity, provided it does not lead to addiction or harm. The Catechism emphasizes the importance of respecting our health as a gift from God. While smoking cigars may not significantly harm health when done sparingly, habitual use that risks health or promotes dependency could be morally questionable. Like any indulgence, it requires the virtue of temperance to ensure it aligns with the dignity of our human nature. An important point was brought up about alcohol: its use has a clear biblical precedent. From Jesus’ miracle at Cana to Paul’s advice to Timothy, Scripture supports the responsible enjoyment of alcohol. However, as was rightly pointed out, drunkenness is condemned in passages like Ephesians 5:18. This demonstrates that moderation and intention are critical. The same logic can apply to cigars. Just as alcohol has cultural and relational significance when used responsibly, cigars might also serve as a means of celebration or camaraderie. However, unlike alcohol, cigars lack sacramental significance and carry more significant health risks. Thus, the justification for their use must be weighed more carefully. The conversation around cannabis is particularly nuanced. While smoking it raises the same concerns as tobacco, the psychoactive effects of THC can impair judgment, which Scripture and the Church caution against. The CCC explicitly condemns drug use that “inflicts grave damage on human health” or “impairs the faculties.” While medical use of cannabis might be legitimate in certain cases, recreational use often lacks a proportionate good to justify its risks. The focus on proportional goods and risks is an excellent principle from Catholic moral reasoning. For instance, eating food with minor toxins (e.g., nicotine in peppers) is justified by its nutritional value. Smoking purely for pleasure, however, lacks such proportionality. Occasional cigar use might be morally permissible if it fosters legitimate recreation or social bonding, but Catholics must avoid rationalizing habitual or harmful behaviors. The virtue of temperance is key. It calls Catholics to moderate their desires and pleasures, avoiding excess and ensuring their actions reflect self-control. This applies to everything from tobacco and alcohol to high-fructose corn syrup. Moreover, the principle of solidarity reminds us to consider how our habits impact others. For example, a parent who smokes might inadvertently model unhealthy behavior for their children, complicating the moral evaluation of their habit. To summarize, occasional cigar use is not inherently immoral but should be approached with prudence and temperance. Catholics are called to honor their bodies as temples of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 6:19-20) and to balance enjoyment with responsibility. Whether it’s cigars, alcohol, or other indulgences, the key is ensuring that our actions align with our faith and promote both our physical and spiritual well-being. I hope this perspective adds value to the conversation. Let’s continue exploring these important questions with charity and wisdom! God bless.
I’ll take care of this in 2 easy steps. 1. Do you believe it is morally acceptable to drink alcohol, which can damage your liver, and to eat sugar rich foods, which can lead to heart Disease, but use moderation to responsibly prevent those negative side effects? If so, then smoking in moderation is morally acceptable too. 2. Are there circumstances under which the exercise of lethal force is the morally right, or even necessary, choice? If so, then martial arts, UFC, American Football, etc. are morally acceptable.
I don’t understand why you reference a “natural law” argument for homosexuality, but then you are talking about the purpose for which certain body parts were created. Just use a theological argument, it is more coherent.
@@JP-rf8rr Honestly that’s a great point. The word “nature” is interesting in this scripture. Personally, I feel Paul is saying homosexuality is unnatural to the purpose of God’s creation. If you think of it this way, it is still a theological argument. I guess when I heard Trent reference natural law, I assumed he was talking about making a secular argument. If he’s talking about the natural law of God’s creation, then I guess he wasn’t making a secular argument.
Trent and other apologists often reference the natural law which has to be about God's creation, because using the Bible is unconvincing to their critics. Using natural law argumentation is obviously not in conflict with theology because the same God created nature as gave us revelation.
Nicotine is a nootropic and can be beneficial for the brain. Also, I think for me, cigars have fostered great friendships, and deep conversations with brothers in Christ. The benefits cigars have brought me far outweigh the potential harms.
@@UnapologeticallyCatholic1 nicotine is in all night shade vegetables (eggplants, tomatoes…) and I don’t know anybody addicted to those vegetables😄 Nicotine is very beneficial for the brain AND immune system but people in general are not ready for this conversation.
@@Laninha8 I agree that nicotine can be beneficial in some cases. But please stop with the nightshade vegetables argument lol. Nicotine exists in parts-per-billion amounts in those plants - e.g. waaaayyyyy too little to even come close to getting an effect.
I respect Trent horn here. There is this macho aesthetic that so many conservative/christian men’s podcasts have atm where they sit and chat while smoking a cigar. It is really cringey imo. Like, you are obviously doing it to be seen doing it. Not because it is a regular habit. And if it is something you are doing all the time, then it is probably too much. I don’t think it is a sin, but should be moderate. But I don’t like the “let’s look manly” as we do our podcast.
Harddddddddd disagree about martial arts. MMA literally saved my life. I was physically abused as a child and it changed everything for me. Gave me confidence and has spiraled into every part of my life over the last 14 years. I met my fiancé through the school. I have taught classes for the last decade. That has resulted in my being able to open a school in my home town and live solely off the craft I have developed. That has led to being able to open other businesses to help the local community and expand my charity work. Over the last decade I have taught countless children and adults who have been able to overcome hardships, bullying and in some cases had to use their training to defend themselves. In other cases I have gotten to work with and help many people build professional careers ranging from the local level to the ufc, building a living and providing for themselves. Being weak is not virtuous. Not being able to defend yourself or your family in a physical confrontation is not virtuous. (And I promise you. A lot of people think they can fight. In reality they have to idea of what real violence is like. ) unfortunately that comes at a cost, like most things in life. All sports cause damage. There is a much bigger picture here, the good vastly outweighs the negatives that come with mixed martial arts. Train smart. Train often. You never know when you may need it. Ton of respect for this channel but big miss on that point. Sorry for the rant.
Trent himself practices bjj, so he isn't against martial arts. He's wary of what is essentially bloodsports, modern day gladiator games, where the goal is for two people who are made in the image of God beat each other for the entertainment and gambling opportunities of others. Sure, there are people who watch it for the technique or the athleticism, but you'll find infinitely more KO montages than montages of skillful sweeps or defensive maneuvers.
@@Fiddleslip you cannot control what other people do. The morality of martial arts is not determined by if others have bad intentions when watching. Otherwise baseball is also immoral. People can and will gamble on anything. As far as KOs and KO highlights. Those come as a result of well executed technique, timing , reaction and skill. Unfortunately people get hurt as a result but the same applies to any realm of athletic achievement. If you are going to strive for the highest level, the threat of injury will always be present. Look at Ronnie Coleman the bodybuilder, he has destroyed his body to become the best. Was that immoral? Not in my opinion, it wasn’t his intention to do so. Some sports are lower risk and some are higher risk. Most fighters I know are not fighting to hurt people. They are fighting because of the reasons I stated above. The problem is people watch it and make assumptions but know nothing about these people or their motivations. I am just blessed to have been in a position to work with these people for the last 14 years. It’s just a lack of understanding on the part of Trent imo. I do not believe it’s ill intentioned
as a smoker, yes. it is morally wrong to consume any susbtance for hedonistic reasons and that you know cause harm. when i smoke i cant go for a run the next day because my lungs are damaged. there are other ways to deal with stress
I can't say if it's a sin or immoral, it's just an unhealthy habit. There is nothing beneficial about it. When I was in school, the only kids that smoked were the "bad" kids.
What bothered me, was the pervasive lie that began in early 2020 that: "Smokers are better protected from COVID than non-smokers". The opposite was true, because all else being equal, smokers have weaker immune systems than non-smokers do.
@@Scorch1028 Eh, the COVID crisis was ripe with all sorts of nonsense. If I recall correctly there was a Belorussian politician who said that drinking large quantities of alcohol (it was vodka, I believe) would prevent you from getting COVID. Or an article about the supposed benefits of masturbation against that same disease.
That’s not correct. Smoking has numerous documented health benefits, what you mean is documented risks outweighs benefits. Nicotine for instance improves memory recall, reduces psychosis (a big reason why most homeless people use tobacco) derivatives of nicotine are used to treat Parkinson’s disease, improves short term energy, etc There is in fact benefits to tobacco usage. You may claim benefits are not worth risk but that’s a different argument
I think that the carcinogen argument only goes so far. Because the risk is present but it can be reasonably mitigated. I don’t think anyone should chain smoke, certainly. But there’s a point at which I think well I could get mouth cancer, Lord forbid, from smoking a pipe with my brother every once and awhile-maybe once a week at most-or I could develop esophageal cancer from GERD, or lung cancer from the pollution in the Salt Lake Valley. Now, if I get cancer from smoking I’m going to wish that I didn’t smoke but I’m also going to say “okay, this is fair. I knew the risks involved.” But if I spend my entire life denying myself the pleasurable effects of nicotine in order not to develop cancer and I get cancer anyways, I’m going to be frustrated. I think what I’m saying is that I don’t believe the effects of tobacco are direct and certain enough to make it inherently immoral. Like smoking meth is immoral because everyone I’ve ever known to smoke meth has ruined their lives. But you can use tobacco to where your chances of dying of anything else are still higher than cancer. Like honestly because of my temperament, I’m more likely to die of stress related illnesses which are relieved by tobacco. Further more I would refute the natural law argument by saying it’s the administration of a drug. Just as sodomy is disordered but a suppository is not. And yes there is a health risk but as Trent said, a lot of medicine is just diluted poison. I take Concerta for my ADHD and that’s basically just time released micro-doses of meth and it does put me at risk of cardiovascular problems but the therapeutic effect it has on my executive dysfunction and my ability to get stuff done outweighs that.
I don’t think this is a good argument, the mouth is often used to absorb medications. You can’t just say it wasn’t meant to do something when it indeed does serve a purpose.
I don't believe that smoking is inherently immoral. When it comes to substances its the abuse of the substance I regard as immoral. I define abuse as the use of the substance to satisfy a disordered desire. I havn't really delved deeply into this line of thought, but that's my surface level analysis.
Sure, that’s true in extreme cases. But we’re talk about smoking specifically. And at least with sugar it naturally occurs in the body, and you need some. Smoking literally has no intrinsic value or need
In 1619 or 20, a Jesuit doctor in Macau, Fr. Johann Schreck (a student of and correspondent with prickly Galileo), conducted an autopsy on a Jesuit from the Japan mission who had died prematurely: he attributed the priest's damaged lungs to heavy smoking. So for 400 years the connection has been known clinically (let alone the knowledge by native Americans before that.) (Ironically, in the 1950s Pope Pius XII became alarmed at the rates of heavy smoking in the Jesuits, and instructed them to quit as inconsistent with the vow of poverty, and wanted them to not accept novices who smoked...) When my father, whose own smoking father died of lung cancer, started medical school in London in 1950, at his very first class their lecturer told them that smokers got cancers that non-smokers don't and advised them strongly to quit ASAP. So that is about 75 years ago now. The jury was never out. The flipside? There is a history of hundreds of years in the West of self-unaware nicotine addicts and commercial interests pushing loopholes and denials and bizarre attempts to sell an addiction as "freedom" (from these do-gooder people and nanny-state trying to tell you what to do.) But an addiction is not an exercise of freedom but of slavery. Smokers are particular suckers for forms of delivery that the sellers promise are slightly safer and therefore somehow actually a responsible choice, of course: filters, hookahs, bongs, cigars, etc. B.t.w. The current advice on cigars? "Although cigar smokers have lower rates of lung cancer, coronary heart disease, and lung disease than cigarette smokers, they have higher rates of these diseases than those who do not smoke cigars. All cigar and cigarette smokers, whether or not they inhale, directly expose their lips, mouth, tongue, throat, and larynx to smoke and its toxic and cancer-causing chemicals. In addition, when saliva containing the chemicals in tobacco smoke is swallowed, the esophagus is exposed to carcinogens. These exposures probably account for the similar oral and esophageal cancer risks seen among cigar smokers and cigarette smokers." Cigar factsheet, National Cancer Institute
Matt's attempt at a cannabis/Jesus analogy is faulty. Substances like opium, mandrake, and even cannabis existed in Israel during Christ's time. While cannabis is believed to have originated from Mongolia and Southern Siberia, the cultural equivalents to wine from the Mediterranean would have been airag (3,000 years old) and kumis (2,500 years old). These drinks were commonly used at wedding celebrations. For instance, in Mongolia, the couple drinks airag from the same shumaa to signify unity, paralleling the symbolic use of wine in Jewish wedding traditions.
If Christ had incarnated in Asia, I think a closer analogy would have been consecrating tea instead of wine. I had heard that part of the point of using the bread and wine (besides its obvious ties to Passover) was that it was the common food and drink, making the Eucharist accessible to people (perhaps as opposed to having to use a lamb every Mass). I had also heard that wine was the common drink in those days because the alcohol content actually helped keep out certain germs that could be present if you drank water. In Asia tea became popular, and heating the water for tea also kills germs. I know that the current rules are that the bread to be consecrated must be pure wheat bread, and the wine must be pure grape wine, but I once had a conversation with a priest who thinks this is a hardship in countries suited to other crops besides wheat and grapes. They end up having to import food in order to have Mass, which can be expensive for poor countries. He wished the rules could be relaxed so people could use their local grains and fruits for consecration. It makes some sense to me. I wonder whether that rule is infallible teaching and changing it would make the consecration invalid or if it is more of a discipline that could be changed. I also wonder when the tradition of using wheat and grapes began. I don't recall any Bible verses that say what kind of bread Jesus used for the Last Supper. Do we know a reason why it would have been wheat? Maybe that is what was used at Passover? I know barley loaves were eaten at the multiplication of the loaves miracle. Is there a reason we shouldn't at least be able to use barley also?
That’s the biggest dagger in the inmorality argument. Tobacco use, and smoking, has been around for Catholics for several hundred years. It’s not a new or novel moral issue. And yet the Church has been clearly permissive about it. The Church has never condemned smoking or tobacco, the theologians and manualists never decried it, and many saints, clerics, and popes smoked and used tobacco. If this were a new issue, then yes the question would be more open. But the argument from silence is very strong when it’s been the silence is permissive for hundreds of years now.
@@CatholicSamurai That argument cuts both ways For most of history nobody knew how bad smoking was for you. It has always be wrong to abuse your body and your health, not only for practical reasons but also because our bodies are gifts from God that ought to be respected. The argument from silence doesn't work because most of that silence happened before the better information about smoking's negative effects came out. In fact, the Church was equally silent during the push to eliminate smoking after its negative effects were exposed. This isn't to say that I know for certain smoking is always and everywhere immoral, but recent research makes it a new issue and has opened a question that we must work to answer with faith and reason.
"I hate that we disagree on this, because I know that your smarter than me and would beat me if we argued about it." I love how Matt just concedes immediately. Why do people take him seriously? 😂
I'm gonna say Trents pretty wrong here. His argument is similar to saying it's immoral to eat lobster or another animal. Or to use salt because it has to be found and impacts cholesterol, its just knit picking stuff to label as immoral or sinful. Not to mention, his argument or "lack of justification" is exactly what fundamentalists use to condemn alcohol. Whereas, the catholic faith absolutely does not condemn alcohol consumption nor do most christian denominations, because it is not inherently immoral
False, salt is a necessary ingredient to our lives. You’re coping be you don’t want to give up your vice. Why don’t you man up and be a little stronger
As far as I know until the recent health fascists got in charge the Vatican had the highest % of smokers of any state, I also remember a phot of a bishops conference from the 50's, there was not one without a cigarette , cigar or pipe. So to sum up ' smoking is immoral' = 90 % of the clergy have been immoral for the past 500 years. I think not.
I presume these bishops did not want to criticize the speck of ash in smokers' eyes when they had the same mote in theirs? Not quite the attitude appropriate for pastors, but understandable... Time for a change.
Interesting talk. It blew my mind that green peppers had nicotine. Turns out lots of veggies do including potatoes, tomatoes, celery, cauliflower and eggplants. But they have it in extremely small amounts. A cigarette has between 6-28 milligrams of nicotine. A whole eggplant, which is supposed to have a lot for a vegetable, has between 0.0136-0.025 milligrams per eggplant depending on how big it is.
I think smoking is bad. It's not just about the person but the family members who they harm via second-hand smoke. My friends dad smoked all throughout her childhood - she always had issues with breathing that disappeared the second she moved out. Same with my dad. His father smoked, and he had constant issues with asthma. all of that disappeared the moment he moved out to get married. I think we just don't hold this predominantly male hobby to the same standard because dudes don't want to admit the negative affect they have on the health of those around them.
I couldn't read it: how does he define "moderation?" If it is subjective, or excludes current medical recommendation (which is that there is no safe level of tobacco smoking, from the US NIH) then it may just be the addiction talking. Addicts think they are rational rather than merely rationalizing.
at 4:02 the answer is that there aren't any. All studies on smoking don't separate cigarettes, cigars and pipes. There was one I found a while ago where the researcher was trying use other studies to find out the difference in health risks between the types but they stopped citing that despite looking through hundreds of studies on smoking there was so little data on different types that they could only get so many worth while samples for their paper. This is why if you smoke a cigar or pipe and is asked "do you smoke" by the doctor you should ALWAYS just lie and say no. If you say yes they'll act like you smoke 3 packs of cigarettes a day (cigarettes mind you are the worst and most unhealthy ways of using tobacco. Literally sucking on a fiberglass tube filled with artificial chemicals that have some tobacco sprinkled in it for flavor.)
Exactly. His whole argument is invalid not being honest with how different these products are and the reasons people generally partake in them. I thought he was smarter than that.
I’m a Catholic who is honestly not in good standing due to my romantic life. Other than that i try and live within Catholic boundaries. I smoke marijuana, and i don’t see a problem with that since were allowed to drink alcohol to have a good time going by the wedding at Cana.
@@JeffersonElder What evil? The evil you and others made up out of thin air? 30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength. 31 The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself. There is no commandment greater than these.” Just be a good man, don’t go crazy about detail while the world is burning.
@@DumplingRabbit Thats not the point. The point is that if you believe God is upset with you over smoking the pipe on your porch at the end of a long day, then you are lost in details. Someone smoking a pipe says nothing at all.
My stance is a bit complicated and I’m not good at summing it up. I am fine with Natural Tobacco use. But habitual or addictive use to me is Sin. We have to be managers of our facilities. I also feel we can’t use it for escapism. But rather just something to just do because you want to just do it. It also has to be legal usage.
Short answer: no! Why is this even a question? Oh, I know. With Novous Ordo thinking, you have to speculate, trying to reinvent the wheel just like the protestants do. The Traditional thinking is that smoking can be done in moderation. This also applies to drinking alcohol and even gambling.
The mouth wasn't designed for cigar smoke... I think you do have an issue of asking what is the mouth designed for. I don't mean that in an antagonistic way, I mean does the mouth only exist for utility? Do you really need to kiss your wife to give her pleasure? I'm not being a goofball. I'm simply pointint out the mouth of all body parts in its frankly infinite facets, its hard to really say what its well defined purpose is. It was not designed to consume medicine, and yet we can and are good to do so. I wouldn't ascribe virtue to a cigar anymore than I would to benadryl or desert. Bad diet kills most people, far more than substances, and yet we don't ascribe mortal sin to being 10% overweight, though it kills more people. Just got to have a balanced view of things. Commercial Cigarettes are horrible for you, I can't be near them because you inhale all this second hand smoke cigarette smokers are chugging those things. But cigars with my asthma... my body does not react badly to them, I don't know what to say beyond that. It reacts like I'm taking in nurishment. I at most smoke once a week, more commonly every other month, but my body responds very well to a cigar in that context.
I disagree with Trent but your argument i think can be easily argued you can within reason use safety equipment so your eyes and lungs are not easily damaged and it is wrong to choose to not use said safety equipment
![BLACK BAG - Official Trailer [HD] - Only in Theaters March 14](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Du0Xp8WX_7I/mqdefault.jpg)
The fact that the Catechism speaks of moderation when it speaks of tobacco use (as well as alcohol use) means that it's not intrinsically disordered. There can't be a moderate amount of murder or adultery because those things are disordered and thus always and everywhere wrong.
Genuine question from a seeking non-Catholic: Can this follow with marijuana? Clearly there is disorder with a wake-and-bake/high-all-day pot head, but for someone who likes a pipe of weed in the evening, is this permissible?
And the church is infallible so this couldn’t be an error.
@oatmealtruck7811 I'm not an expert on the topic but it seems you're about right, marijuana in moderation would fall under a non intrinsically sinful activity and would be permissible.
@@oatmealtruck7811 Most likely not because it has a psychedelic effect. Nicotine has a calming effect, it doesn't carry the potential for hearing or seeing things. I'd say it's closer to comparing a wine glass of moonshine to a wine glass of wine.
@@walkermott1750 weed is not psychedelic though it can be very relaxing just like having a drink. But it can make you think a lot more, it could be used for good if you have ADHD like me it used to make me very focused on what i was doing or thinking. I don’t use it anymore because i don’t know what the church says yet, im a revert.
I’m 34 years old and have lived with progressive interstitial lung disease for the last 10 years. I only smoked a bit as a teenager so it’s probably not the cause but I can safely say that lung disease is NOT something you want to mess around with. I see no benefits to smoking.
You shouldnt due to your condition. But for others, it helps you relax
For the average person, excluding cigarettes, smoking helps you focus without being a downer.
Have you been tested for alpha 1 antitrypsin deficiency ? It’s a protease inhibitor and normally stops them breaking down proteins - but if you lack this then many enzymes that break down proteins are active - destroying your lungs. You’re quite young for international lung disease.
@@Thedisciplemike Relax you? Only after first making you jittery...
@@rickjelliffe1580 not my experience
Sounds like a debate needs to happen between Trent Horn and Jimmy Akin on this.
Yeah, we as Catholics need more to disagree internally about. (I kid, I kid. It would be fun.)
But I believe Jimmy only has advocated pipe smoking. Not sure what his position is on cigars and cigarettes.
This would be great
@@TheJmlew11There isn't much difference between pipe smoking and cigar smoking. Both are smoked for the aroma and flavor and neither are smoked for inhaling smoke into the lungs in order to get a buzz or fix. That being said Pope Benedict smoke cigarettes and several other Catholics including saints enjoyed all varieties of tobacco
@@TheJmlew11cigars are as pure of tobacco as pipe smoking. Cigarettes have chemicals and fillers.
I wouldn’t go so far as to say it’s intrinsically immoral, but I also think it’s likely that many people who tote the “moderation” line are actually exceeding it.
I mean, even a daily cigar seems quite excessive. I also think having a glass of whiskey or fast food every evening is probably excessive.
@@Deuterocomical I agree. Honestly I don’t know anybody who smokes who isn’t an addict. I’ve met folks who can moderate alcohol, but I’ve never met anyone who smoked who could take it or leave it. You’re either smoking everyday (or more) or not at all. At least that’s my anecdotal experience.
@@christopherponsford8385I smoked socially when I was in college, and did it in moderation. I was never addicted.
@@christopherponsford8385almost every cigar smoker I personally know smokes only occasionally, usually when men get together.
@@christopherponsford8385 I smoke about 1 cigar a month, so maybe Im biased because I think I have mastered moderation lol
Exactly. The issue lies in what is moderate for the individual. It will certainly vary a lot based on tons of factors. Knowing where to stop can be hard if one already has a habit of engaging in the near occasion of sin. It would be better to avoid such things even if they aren't intrinsically immoral if you have a bad history to go with it.
Forget vegans... I've never met a (TLM) cigar smoker who didn't insist on telling me how moral it is...
Truth!
Any substance abuse is a sin of gluttony.
…you mean usually in response to a teetotaler who first insists that it’s wrong?
I’ve seldom met anyone who, unprompted, begins to defend tobacco use… but if I had a dime for every person who’s gone out of their way to making remarks objecting to smoking and make me feel like I’m bad, I’d have enough cash to fund Thursday’s year-end bonus
@@its-thom how about the guy complaining about trads "forbidding what is permissable" simultaneously raising "serious concerns" on cigar smoking.
I've literally never had someone come up to me and unprompted start defending cigar smoking....As a matter of fact, I've never had anyone unprompted just start talking cigars in general with me.
What are you doing to get people to defend smoking to you?
It's not that complicated. Moderation is a virtue. Excess is a vice. This applies to smoking, drinking and all sorts of activities. There is simply no Biblical or theological basis for the prohibition of either one.
smoking is a vice though
OP suggests *excess* smoking is a vice, if there were biblical grounds for complete prohibition we should post them. I personally don’t agree with smoking, because it’s a pathway to excess, but I also haven’t seen explicit prohibition in scripture.
@@justintaylor3044 There isn't a prohibition from the Church, but it is nonetheless a vice.
@@brandoncummins7813 How is it a vice?
@@brandoncummins7813pope John XXIII had that vice.
I smoke cigars only on special occasions. When the sun comes up, when the sun goes down, when I hear a dog bark,etc.etc.
I smoke about 15 cigars a day, and I inhale.
I heard Freud smoked 20 cigars a day and it cost him his lower jaw
do you actually inhale cigars? how!
Sure buddy lmao
@@stevedevine6380 Good man.
😂😂😂
I gave up smoking 17 years ago as my body is a temple of the Holy Spirit.
@@ozzy_au that is commendable and God bless you. However remember, it is not what goes in the body but what comes out is what defiles it.
But every temple needs incense!
@@erathor9120 in context, yes. That isn't in context.
@@ozzy_au Well if what came out was sinful and it restricted you and made you less free then it was very good you made the decision to quit, is what I am saying.
@@erathor9120 In context. With that in mind Cigars defile your body and harm your cardiovascular system. It is number 1 reason for lung cancer. My brother in Christ, be honest to yourself
I hope Trent gives us an expansive video on cigar smoking with proper reaserch sources and stuff. I'd love to hear it.
The issue is that there are few studies on the matter, and these studies are often univaried.
There were big studies in the past which proved that the various forms of tobacco act differently.
Also even if a studies concluded that there was no significant risk found then they still have to say that "smoking kills". (This has already happened.)
I am with Trent. So many Catholics act like it's a virtue to smoke.
It's definitely not a virtue, but I wouldn't necessarily say it's sinful either. The church has never condemned smoking to my knowledge except Marijuana
@@thejcatholicIt has never condemned drinking wine either. And alcoholic is one thing and drinks alcohol for pleasure on occasion or what have you is not problematic. Yet even wine has suspected carcinogens. Onions have suspected carcinogens.
@@thejcatholic True
And, unfortunately, Matt is one of them.
@@NickyMetropolis1313 Unfortunately, among most people, it's a lot easier to develop a nicotine addiction than a dependency on alcohol. Nicotine is a stimulant, and many smokers enjoy the feeling of being alert throughout the day. Alcohol is a depressant, and very few people want to feel drowsy throughout the day, particularly employed people. Consequently, more people become chain-smokers than alcoholics.
I am glad Trent recognizes the inconsistency problems involved with these extended natural law arguments. They seem to work fine for issues we don't need them for (like homosexual activity, rape, murder, etc.), but their use beyond named sins leads to problems when applied consistently.
-Mom and Grandmother both died from emphysema (from smoking);
-Father had Buerger disease (smoking related), and had both legs from the knees down and several fingers amputated;
-Grandfather had 14 heart attacks, the last one took his life (smoking and obesity related);
-Aunt died of esophageal cancer (smoking and obesity related).
@@alex_jermaine Yes actually. Because there is a significant difference between the various versions of tobacco.
@@alex_jermaine That is objectively not true.
14! How??
@@alex_jermaine Exactly!
@@samuraibat1916 No idea how. He was ornery. He snuck out of the hospital room to smoke in the stairwell and got caught by my grandma! I was there for that. lol 😂
Alcohol, smoked meats, plastics, certain cosmetics, plenty of day-to-day things are carcinogenic. It may be unwise to willingly expose oneself to it, it can be imprudent, but sinful? I doubt it. Consequences don't define the morality of a behavior.
No, but the intention does.
All I'm hearing are excuses to poke the crocodile
@@Pietrosavr I think intention, place, time and amount all matter.
I usually find it unpersuasive to use scientific studies to bolster moral arguments. Is it immoral for me to spend more than 15 minutes in the sun during peak UV without slathering myself in SPF 50? Should I reject as immoral a diet heavy in red meat because “studies” tell me to prefer plants for my own health and for the environment?
Besides, cigar smoking can contribute greatly to conviviality, which is great for the soul.
I largely agree with you but I do think that there's a clear difference between minor sunburns or eating red meat and smoking cigars/cigarettes in terms of overall health risks.
@@IntegralistRevival I have read studies proving 2 cigars a day have no negative health effects. I’ve read countless studies in the benefits of red meat (contra the mainstream narrative). Or what about sleep? Is it immoral for me to routinely sleep less than 7 hours a night, or fail to wear blue light blocking glasses begging 3 hours before bed? Besides, all these studies tend to implicitly reduce us to our bodies and don’t (can’t) take into consideration our hylomorphic makeup. For these and many more reasons I just find using scientific studies a good basis for moral judgments. God bless you brother. Now GO SMOKE A CIGAR. 😂😂
@@IntegralistRevivalNo there isn't because smoking one or two cigars per day is a minor risk. Just like getting too much sun is a minor risk overall.
As I have said elsewhere the list of Saints who have smoked tobacco products of all sorts is very long. Smoking cigars for example generally relieves stress and helps in relaxation. Well the number one killer by far is heart disease from too much stress.
There are increasing studies showing how sugar is bad for you. This means that every Christmas party when we eat sugar cookies or other variety we are engaging in a unhealthy behavior that can contribute to gluttony and also cause cancer and/or diabetes. These arguments against smoking really don't stick. Red wine has suspected carcinogens as do onions yes onions. None of these health arguments really stick the landing.
It’s the effects of smoke on others who are not smoking. All those combustion products are not good for people
@@enderwiggen3638 you’re also seemingly assuming that I’m talking about smoking around others who want nothing to do with it when in fact in my experience that is never the case. We smoke in cigar shops or my patio, etc. I’m not lighting up on an airplane.
It is written, all things are permissible but not all things are beneficial, food for the stomach and stomach for food but I shall be a slave to neither.
@@TempleofChristMinistries Amen
Its true you can have " unhealthy" food in moderation as long as its offset with healthier choices, it will not do any damage to your genes or your general health.. problem is nicotene creates lifelong addicts so its not a matter of choice to eat something or not or willpowers or abstinence but a virtual compulsion fueled by changes in brain and body because of nicotene . its a poison and you by smoking are poisoning others around you who have no choice its a disgusting habit
@@heartofpuregold I agree with what you were saying but is it immoral.
@@TempleofChristMinistries my comment disappeared
@@TempleofChristMinistries what am i saying? Its not even here anymore... am I permitted an opinion on you tube land before it gets deleted by the op or admin, just for saying smoking is gross its the truth, most people dont see the end stages of smoking but i have its a travesty and disgusting habit, seems like on you tube land people can make up baloney and slander others but we got no right of reply back ...now even catholics are doing it..really bad
I mean couldnt you say that drinking soda is immoral because your mouth wasnt meant to drink flavored carbonated water with chemicals and you could get diabetes from drinking soda?
Yeah man. I don't think following the logic to its natural conclusion doesn't lead to where anyone wants to end up.
I don't think smoking is sinful per se. But it can become sinful if 1) you are making others uncomfortable with the smoke (Mt 5, 21-22 ; Romans 14,13 ; Gn 13,8) CCC 2284, 2) you put yourself at risk for addictive use (thou shalt not kill, CCC 2288) 3) you become attached to wordly things to the point you spend your money, time and heart in smoking (Dt 6,5 ; CCC 2405)
Thou shall not murder. Killing is fine murder is not.
spot on
Almost everything can be sinful. Going to adoration when you should be doing something else like feeding your child or doing chores is sinful.
Drinking water to the point where you know your body will get damaged is sinful.
When more people smoked the obesity epidemic was not nearly as bad as it was. Nobody's arguing that eating bread is immoral. The list of saints that smoked cigars pipes or cigarettes or used nasal snuff is very long
In boxing and ufc, one gains points by harming their opponent. The intrinsic goal is to harm the other person. In football the intrinsic goal is to get the ball into the end zone. Yes, tackling is part of the game but the goal is to stop the other team from advancing the ball when tackling not to inflict harm. Hurting your opponent is the fundamental goal of combat sports but the same is not true of football.
@@bilbobaggins9893 YES
So defense in football is intrinsically evil? Describe a way that a a defender can stop a runningback running right at him that does inflict damage on him or the runningback. Is the runningback sinnning for running at such speed and power that he leaves the defender no choice but to harm him?
And this goes for every sport. In running uou push your body right up to edge of breaking down during a race In gymnastics they stunt the growth of female gymnasts to make them better. I think women’s gymnasts is actually an immoral sport wjen they do that.
I disagree, the intrinsic goal isn't to harm your opponent but to outperform them, you can win a UFC match without causing any lasting harm to your opponent, although it's unlikely. Also, you're failing to take into account the individual goals of the positions in football. Your job as a lineman you could argue is intrinsically violent.
"Alcohol is diluted poison" I love that. I just call it pee in a can. ☠
I wonder how you would defend drinking alcohol (a poison) along the lines of a general thought like Trent’s initial proposition. It’s clearly allowed in scripture, has negative health effects, etc
Sugar has negative health effects. It's a rabbit hole. The test ought to be whether your body actually utilizes it for anything positive (calories) or is it a pure vice. Even good and necessary things in excess are sinful (gluttony).
@@flamingdragon3861 Seems to be more the idea of losing yourself to the addiction is the sin, putting the sin before God.
Some limited alcohol intake (particularly in red wine) can actually reduce stress.
I'd say an occasional drink 🍷🍻 or two, fine. Drunkenness EVER, bad.
@@kdmdlocigar smoking and pipe smoking and cigarette smoking absolutely 100% reduce stress.
The thing is, nicotine also has benefits, not just harms. It can help with focus and cognitive functioning and cigars in particular can help with stress and making you more calm, so I dont think its as simple as Trent makes it out to be. In the end, its all about moderation and different nicotine products vary based on their harms
Are we really making the claim that boxing and UFC are sinful? So ridiculous. Martial arts teach young men the responsibility of being able to use violence, this is a fundamental issue in manhood. Just because something has risk doesn’t mean it’s sinful. The (male) human body was made for combat, higher brow ridges, thicker bones, faster reaction times and the weight distribution of a male body is optimized for warfare. Such things aren’t present when it comes to cigarettes or other smokables. Martial arts can be a good exercise as they’re mentally stimulating as well.
Yes!
In the Age of Christendom, we had a strong tradition of combat competition between boys and between young men (even if some persons objected to some specific sports such as jousting)
Combat sports are not novel modern inventions.
According to the Church, combat sports are not inherently evil, nor is watching them, but many Catholic theologians have discussed whether prize fighting is sinful. Something like the UFC itself could definitely be considered sinful, even if the combat sports used in it are not by design evil. Self Defense is good. Some wars are morally acceptable. Getting enjoyment from and betting on two people beating the crap out of each other walks a line that some theologians believe to be immoral. Are you enjoying the skill involved, or the violence? Are you training combat sports specifically to hurt people, or simply to be fit and be able to defend yourself? The intentions always matter. "Made for combat" doesn't necessitate being used for combat. We were "made for combat" in order to protect each other and hunt food, not to hurt each other.
@@holdintheaces7468 I agree that the intentions matter, I suppose the question is where does one draw the line. Is one glorifying violence when one eats a chicken wing? Arguably, more violence was done to enable that enjoyment than allowing to prize fighters to duke it out. Same argument for a salad as plants are also living things, not making an argument for veganism, just that I don’t see many people liking a sport merely because there’s violence involved, rather the violence heightens the need for skill and ability. Some individuals may like it for violence’s own sake but that is an issue between them and God and therefore I don’t believe that is cause enough to condemn the enjoyment of a combat sport.
There was a christian judo practitioner who was disciplined in the olympics for making a sign of the cross, should he not been a practitioner of said sport?
@@EUSA1776 Come now. Those aren't analogous situations at all and you know it.
Don't take my argument personally. I wasn't saying you were sinful in enjoying them (I didn't even state that it's definitively sinful, merely pointed out that some theologians have argued it can be). But you have to admit that there are most definitely people out there that enjoy things like the UFC solely for the violence. If the violence didn't play a role, fencing would be more popular.
I only smoke Liturgical: Good smelling incense!
3:04 I think there's a difference between UFC and football in that UFC (and boxing) are geared toward causing injury, whereas football has it as a consequence. Combat sports which have as their object to cause injury are disordered, but football isn't ordered toward causing injury, and to do so can in fact cause one to be penalized while playing football. You win at boxing by causing harm, you can be ejected from football for intentionally causing harm.
@@aaroncatron2306 exactly what I was thinking as well!
Pipe smoking is medicinal to me. I don’t remember who it was but I heard about someone who was dealing with a lot of stress, had hypertension, etc. They began smoking a pipe to relax at the end of the day and the next time they went to the doctor their test results were much better. The doc said “I don’t know what you changed but keep it up.”
This was an interesting debate, but I feel like some key points were missing or downplayed, especially about the risks of cigar smoking. Matt Fradd seemed to brush over just how dangerous cigars are-there’s a clear link between cigar smoking and cancers of the palate, larynx, stomach, and bladder. Look at Sigmund Freud, who smoked cigars for years and eventually died from related health issues. The idea that cigars are somehow safer because they don’t have additives like cigarettes doesn’t change the fact that even “natural” substances can be really harmful when inhaled.
One big issue that wasn’t really touched on is the impact smoking can have on others. Smoking around non-smokers forces them to inhale second-hand smoke, which is not only uncomfortable but also dangerous. As Catholics, we’re called to be mindful of the well-being of others, and smoking around people who didn’t choose to be exposed to it could be seen as selfish or inconsiderate.
Also, I think comparing alcohol (wine, especially) to something like cannabis doesn’t quite fit. Wine was a staple in Jesus’ time, something essential for life and symbolic of joy-and of course, it plays a major role in the sacraments. Cannabis, while it may have medicinal uses, is mostly a recreational drug today, so the comparison feels off.
I think the conversation could have benefited from a deeper look at the health risks and the moral responsibility to avoid harming others, especially when it comes to second-hand smoke.
A counter could be that weed was used by the Priests in the temple, as was wine.
@@theresefrancis9283 I know that it has been found in archeological sites in Israel, but was it ever in the temple in Jerusalem?
I’m a Protestant but I have so much respect for the intentionality that Trent approaches subjects like this and wrestles with them for the sake of being more Christ-like.
Fascinating discussion!
Matt, this was brutal to watch as you kept interrupting Trent and changing the topic.
excess is the key to trent's argument. every regular smoker is basically doing it in excess even though society doesn't see it as such but once you smoke multiple times per day, it is an addiction and many smokers admit to it, and also submit to it. with drinking it is very different. most people who drink are not addicted as they only do it on special occasions or gatherings. tell a smoker to not smoke for a few days and they get headaches and then it's a noticable physical addiction.
I love a good cigar or smoking pipes. It’s not an addictive activity, it’s not giving you any high, it’s just an activity. Most cigar and pipe smokers are not dying sooner, because they don’t inhale. Also, many doctors say HPV viruses are more dangerous for mouth cancers. Look, my grandmother died at 99 after needing 10 years of help because dementia. Is that the way to go? Anyway, at the end of the day it is no one’s business other than God in relation to me. I know I’m a good man, so I don’t worry one bit about this.
People have been cooking over open fires like forever, that’s natural law. Smoke doesn’t matter because we’re all coming to a certain end anyway. Fear of that should worry you more.
It's relaxing!
All tobacco contains nicotine and nicotine is addictive. It is an addictive activity, and any addiction is a form of slavery. You can lie to yourself and claim it isn't addictive, but don't lie to other people. Also, people who cook over open fires die earlier than people who don't.
Yes, we are all going to die, but dying not because of but with a disordered worldly attachment can affect the state you die in. And encouraging others to die in that state is something you don't want to do. It's the thing that it you should be afraid of.
I disagree. It always gives me a high -- but its less potent than the high I used to get from weed
We also don't smoke 20 cigars a day 😂
What is the order for the tobacco leaf? What purpose does it have outside its use for smoking?
Wirh all love and respect sir, please may the guest speak without disruption
✅️
For real
He barely interrupted, and it was always to talk about something Trent just said.
A conversation is a two way exchange, not a 20 minute monologue. This isn't a structured debate.
Thanks Matt and Trent, may I add a personal point, a close family member of mine smoked all her life (moderately, 20 cigarettes = 2days) and could not completely give them up due to anxiety and nervousness when trying to do so. Sometimes it may be virtually impossible to quit due to a persons disposition.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
To quote Kipling, "A woman is only a woman, but a good cigar is a smoke".
"That's when a smoke was a smoke, and groovin was groovin."
I smoked for years and I wasn’t going to church for years which I now regret . I kept praying to God to please help me stop smoking because I became a lector at church ⛪️ and I felt it was wrong to smoke and standing in the alter . God answered my prayer 🙏 after the 4th covid vaccine 💉 I have because allergic to alcohol, nicotine and cannabis which I was using for my fibromyalgia. I now thank God because I can stand on the alter clean and without vices but I’m also allergic to many meds that I need for my different medical conditions. I just say Jesus Christ help me 🙏 regarding the medical pills but I go forward with the help of God 🙏
That's weird. I've used cannabis for about 10 years I'm in my 60s. I think I'm getting allergic to it. It's hard to find cannabis where I live now, they have legal gummies. I really seem to be allergic to them. It gives me hives.
I started smoking cigarettes and drinking about that time. I NEVER drink now but I'm done with cigarettes for sure. If I get the urge to smoke. I do a one hitter of tobacco. It seems to help. I'm so done with smoking, I don't care if it's sinful or not. It's a horrible habit I don't want!
@@Whereempathsgather all this happened after 4th covid vaccine. I didn’t know I had dormant urticaria and for 3 yrs it’s 24/7. I’m also allergic to any med that can help for the chronic urticaria. I finally found an allergist that found the problem because nobody knew for 2 years what was wrong and I have suffered a lot. There was only 1 option left of a monthly injection of Xiolar and last injection I almost passed out or dying because my breathing stopped for a few seconds and I started hearing things far away . Now I have to avoid the triggers such as sun, heat, spicy 🌶️ foods and can’t take a bath with hot water. It’s gotten better but not gone yet . It’s suppose to go back dormant eventually but when only God knows. It’s been hard. All those things activate the urticaria. I used cannabis for my fibromyalgia and worked very well but after a while I would break out in hives and itch all over . I had to change all the meds I was taking because would also activate my urticaria. I’m down to bare minimum and my fibromyalgia is strong . I just keep praying and having faith that it will go back dormant
Any substance abuse is a sin gluttony.
@@les2997 yes I know that but I needed to stop completely because I felt it was wrong of me as a lector at church to get up on the alter with a vice .
@@soniatorres5227 I never took the jab.... They would have to hog tie me.
They had me on antidepressants for 30 years. 5 attempts because the drugs worked against me. Cannabis help me 100%.
If that's a sin, I'm a huge sinner and God will deal with me later. It's natural, people think it's like alcohol. Alcohol ruined my life! Lost a job because cannabis but it was fine for me to be a drunk, smh! I could go on and on!!
I've been a Christian since I was 12 years old. A bunch of stiffed neck people I run in to. We are all sinners, get the log out of your own eye before you judge people.
I'll pray for you! Don't eat sugar...one of the worse thing you can do, especially, forms of arthritis. Detox with lemons. I also use vinegar in a glass of ice water. It helps with stomach issues.🙏🙏🙏🙏 For you.
Stimulants and depressants both limit the fullness of consciousness. Those who argue that stimulants like nicotine bring the fullness of consciousness out are missing the fact that they essentially make one inpulsive and risk exposing you to vices of impulse more. They should be used with calculation like on a long car ride to safely stay awake or to treat extreme pain.
How about socially as well?
Nicotine doesn't make anyone "impulsive," that is a really bizarre claim.
@@evankalis including caffeine ?
@InFideScientiam I suppose you impulsively smoke? Even then, that's a matter of discipline, which if you are incapable of doing, you should quit. Don't blame the cigar or cigarette for your inability to control yourself.
@@LoganJamesPenn You are replying to the wrong person, I agree with your take lol
Moderation is key, if something like Alcoholic beverages, which are both purely recreational and carcinogenic are are allowed within moderation I fail to see any signifigant moral difference with cigars which are purely recreational and carcinogenic.
When it comes right down to it, if you "overthink" it, everything is sinful , especially when it is overly done. But when you sit and analyze and think and think , you fall into the vicious cycle . You can't even watch TV or videos much less RUclips without seeing a photo that is inappropriate ... so is opening our eyes to the world sinful ? Just depends how much you think about it .
"Yes, gluttony does apply to substance abuse. It's a destructive sin that can lead to addiction, decline in health & even death. The sin's impact on one’s will & life can manifest in behaviors such as substance abuse, making it relevant to the context of addiction & overindulgence"
Fr. Robert Spitzer
Magis Center
I have seen plenty of data that indicate cigars, pipes, and chewing tobacco significantly increase your risks for mouth cancer.
No you haven't because that data don't exist.
@@rickypeppers Well, my brother is an oral surgeon and he has shown me study after study. I'll defer to his expertise rather than yours.
There is no significant study on pipe smoking
Yes but 95% of those studies come from an era where most of the population would brush their teeth like once a month. I imagine a modern study that separates the different forms would have a wildly different results
@@kdmdlo I have read several of those studies, they're mostly inconclusive. They are univaried and often don't consider correlation-causation.
Going down this rabbit hole is stupid because of the points made at 5:15 with chemicals in foods. If smoking cigars is immoral (which nicotine has been proven to have many positive neurological benefits) than so is obesity and being overweight because that isn’t natural to the human condition. And by Trent’s logic only inhaling smoke is immoral and since tobacco is a plant it’s totally acceptable to chew it
It’s crazy because 350.000 child immigrants have gone lost into a horror situation. Let’s talk about that.
No you passive aggressive weirdo 😂
obesity and being overweight is sinful though. It's a mix of gluttony and sloth.
@@CarDevourer 30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength. 31 The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself. There is no commandment greater than these.” All else is rumor isn’t it? Just be a good man, do as well as you can, but let’s not act as fools by going over silly details.
@@denniskatinas Take your pseudo-arguments somewhere else prot. Don't play mind games with me.
I will counter Trent in that I don't think he understands why many people smoke. (particular response to him saying he doesn't know of any good that comes from it) Im in the military, and I smoke small cigars on an infrequent basis, maybe two times a week at most, and I only do so for the simple reason that Nicotine both calms and focuses me. It also provides a social activity that is sadly becoming less common these days. Compared to other people I work with, my intake is pretty low, with some of my fellows needing nicotine just to get through the day. So in this case one could argue that the sinfulness of nicotine usage is in its excess. I would be inclined to agree with this, so long as there is no hypocrisy and we treat other substances the same. (alcohol as the primary example) But more often than not the people I see who complain the most about its usage have no qualms about people having a drink on the weekend.
I guess If I had a final thought it would be; Why do people suddenly care so strongly about this? I've seen many good Catholics who smoked a pipe or cigars and it never occurred to me as being some sort of vice. What's with the sudden teetotaler attitude, are we Catholics or American evangelicals?
So can Police Officers, and soldiers engage in martial arts training without being in sin…?
"Yeah, smoking is bad because it's really bad for you." - me after eating a huge chocolate and caramel sundae with nuts
This was a fascinating discussion, and I appreciate the thoughtfulness both of you brought to it. I’d like to share some reflections on the morality of smoking cigars, as well as other substances like alcohol and cannabis, from a Catholic perspective.
The concern about natural law and tobacco use is valid-our bodies are not "designed" to process harmful substances like nicotine or inhaled smoke. However, Catholic moral theology considers not just the nature of our bodily faculties but also intention, context, and proportionality. Occasional, moderate cigar use might be justifiable as a recreational activity, provided it does not lead to addiction or harm.
The Catechism emphasizes the importance of respecting our health as a gift from God. While smoking cigars may not significantly harm health when done sparingly, habitual use that risks health or promotes dependency could be morally questionable. Like any indulgence, it requires the virtue of temperance to ensure it aligns with the dignity of our human nature.
An important point was brought up about alcohol: its use has a clear biblical precedent. From Jesus’ miracle at Cana to Paul’s advice to Timothy, Scripture supports the responsible enjoyment of alcohol. However, as was rightly pointed out, drunkenness is condemned in passages like Ephesians 5:18. This demonstrates that moderation and intention are critical.
The same logic can apply to cigars. Just as alcohol has cultural and relational significance when used responsibly, cigars might also serve as a means of celebration or camaraderie. However, unlike alcohol, cigars lack sacramental significance and carry more significant health risks. Thus, the justification for their use must be weighed more carefully.
The conversation around cannabis is particularly nuanced. While smoking it raises the same concerns as tobacco, the psychoactive effects of THC can impair judgment, which Scripture and the Church caution against. The CCC explicitly condemns drug use that “inflicts grave damage on human health” or “impairs the faculties.” While medical use of cannabis might be legitimate in certain cases, recreational use often lacks a proportionate good to justify its risks.
The focus on proportional goods and risks is an excellent principle from Catholic moral reasoning. For instance, eating food with minor toxins (e.g., nicotine in peppers) is justified by its nutritional value. Smoking purely for pleasure, however, lacks such proportionality. Occasional cigar use might be morally permissible if it fosters legitimate recreation or social bonding, but Catholics must avoid rationalizing habitual or harmful behaviors.
The virtue of temperance is key. It calls Catholics to moderate their desires and pleasures, avoiding excess and ensuring their actions reflect self-control. This applies to everything from tobacco and alcohol to high-fructose corn syrup. Moreover, the principle of solidarity reminds us to consider how our habits impact others. For example, a parent who smokes might inadvertently model unhealthy behavior for their children, complicating the moral evaluation of their habit.
To summarize, occasional cigar use is not inherently immoral but should be approached with prudence and temperance. Catholics are called to honor their bodies as temples of the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 6:19-20) and to balance enjoyment with responsibility. Whether it’s cigars, alcohol, or other indulgences, the key is ensuring that our actions align with our faith and promote both our physical and spiritual well-being.
I hope this perspective adds value to the conversation. Let’s continue exploring these important questions with charity and wisdom! God bless.
I’ll take care of this in 2 easy steps.
1. Do you believe it is morally acceptable to drink alcohol, which can damage your liver, and to eat sugar rich foods, which can lead to heart Disease, but use moderation to responsibly prevent those negative side effects?
If so, then smoking in moderation is morally acceptable too.
2. Are there circumstances under which the exercise of lethal force is the morally right, or even necessary, choice?
If so, then martial arts, UFC, American Football, etc. are morally acceptable.
I think that is not quite right. There would have to be more steps to make those conclusions.
If y’all are smoking cigars and drinking, I’m gonna have my puffs on the bong.
I don’t understand why you reference a “natural law” argument for homosexuality, but then you are talking about the purpose for which certain body parts were created. Just use a theological argument, it is more coherent.
@@natedawg2020
Because Paul himself references natural law in connection with homosexuality in Romans.
@@JP-rf8rr Honestly that’s a great point. The word “nature” is interesting in this scripture. Personally, I feel Paul is saying homosexuality is unnatural to the purpose of God’s creation. If you think of it this way, it is still a theological argument.
I guess when I heard Trent reference natural law, I assumed he was talking about making a secular argument. If he’s talking about the natural law of God’s creation, then I guess he wasn’t making a secular argument.
Trent and other apologists often reference the natural law which has to be about God's creation, because using the Bible is unconvincing to their critics. Using natural law argumentation is obviously not in conflict with theology because the same God created nature as gave us revelation.
My priest when I lived in San Antonio smokes cigars. I sent him a box of his favorite on Father's Day
lol Trent was totally avoiding the cannabis question
There have been several studies that show that headgear when boxing doesn't protect you, in fact they encourage more severe concussions.
Nicotine is a nootropic and can be beneficial for the brain. Also, I think for me, cigars have fostered great friendships, and deep conversations with brothers in Christ. The benefits cigars have brought me far outweigh the potential harms.
@@UnapologeticallyCatholic1 nicotine is in all night shade vegetables (eggplants, tomatoes…) and I don’t know anybody addicted to those vegetables😄 Nicotine is very beneficial for the brain AND immune system but people in general are not ready for this conversation.
@@Laninha8 I agree that nicotine can be beneficial in some cases. But please stop with the nightshade vegetables argument lol. Nicotine exists in parts-per-billion amounts in those plants - e.g. waaaayyyyy too little to even come close to getting an effect.
I respect Trent horn here. There is this macho aesthetic that so many conservative/christian men’s podcasts have atm where they sit and chat while smoking a cigar. It is really cringey imo. Like, you are obviously doing it to be seen doing it. Not because it is a regular habit. And if it is something you are doing all the time, then it is probably too much. I don’t think it is a sin, but should be moderate. But I don’t like the “let’s look manly” as we do our podcast.
This is an awfully legalistic approach to smoking if you ask me.
Harddddddddd disagree about martial arts. MMA literally saved my life. I was physically abused as a child and it changed everything for me. Gave me confidence and has spiraled into every part of my life over the last 14 years. I met my fiancé through the school. I have taught classes for the last decade. That has resulted in my being able to open a school in my home town and live solely off the craft I have developed. That has led to being able to open other businesses to help the local community and expand my charity work. Over the last decade I have taught countless children and adults who have been able to overcome hardships, bullying and in some cases had to use their training to defend themselves. In other cases I have gotten to work with and help many people build professional careers ranging from the local level to the ufc, building a living and providing for themselves. Being weak is not virtuous. Not being able to defend yourself or your family in a physical confrontation is not virtuous. (And I promise you. A lot of people think they can fight. In reality they have to idea of what real violence is like. ) unfortunately that comes at a cost, like most things in life. All sports cause damage. There is a much bigger picture here, the good vastly outweighs the negatives that come with mixed martial arts. Train smart. Train often. You never know when you may need it. Ton of respect for this channel but big miss on that point. Sorry for the rant.
Trent himself practices bjj, so he isn't against martial arts. He's wary of what is essentially bloodsports, modern day gladiator games, where the goal is for two people who are made in the image of God beat each other for the entertainment and gambling opportunities of others. Sure, there are people who watch it for the technique or the athleticism, but you'll find infinitely more KO montages than montages of skillful sweeps or defensive maneuvers.
@@Fiddleslip you cannot control what other people do. The morality of martial arts is not determined by if others have bad intentions when watching. Otherwise baseball is also immoral. People can and will gamble on anything. As far as KOs and KO highlights. Those come as a result of well executed technique, timing , reaction and skill. Unfortunately people get hurt as a result but the same applies to any realm of athletic achievement. If you are going to strive for the highest level, the threat of injury will always be present. Look at Ronnie Coleman the bodybuilder, he has destroyed his body to become the best. Was that immoral? Not in my opinion, it wasn’t his intention to do so. Some sports are lower risk and some are higher risk. Most fighters I know are not fighting to hurt people. They are fighting because of the reasons I stated above. The problem is people watch it and make assumptions but know nothing about these people or their motivations. I am just blessed to have been in a position to work with these people for the last 14 years. It’s just a lack of understanding on the part of Trent imo. I do not believe it’s ill intentioned
I smoked a cigar while watching UFC 307 this past weekend… guess I’m screwed…
😂😂😂
But why would you spend your time doing that?
@@michaellemmenrelaxation is good and everybody should have hobbies
@michaellemmen because it's entertainment. 🤷 Which before you say it, is not sinful.
@@Adam-ke6uh based. 🗿🗿🗿
as a smoker, yes. it is morally wrong to consume any susbtance for hedonistic reasons and that you know cause harm. when i smoke i cant go for a run the next day because my lungs are damaged. there are other ways to deal with stress
I can't say if it's a sin or immoral, it's just an unhealthy habit. There is nothing beneficial about it. When I was in school, the only kids that smoked were the "bad" kids.
What bothered me, was the pervasive lie that began in early 2020 that: "Smokers are better protected from COVID than non-smokers". The opposite was true, because all else being equal, smokers have weaker immune systems than non-smokers do.
@@Scorch1028 Eh, the COVID crisis was ripe with all sorts of nonsense. If I recall correctly there was a Belorussian politician who said that drinking large quantities of alcohol (it was vodka, I believe) would prevent you from getting COVID. Or an article about the supposed benefits of masturbation against that same disease.
@@Scorch1028
That was a legitimate study that came out though.
That’s not correct. Smoking has numerous documented health benefits, what you mean is documented risks outweighs benefits.
Nicotine for instance improves memory recall, reduces psychosis (a big reason why most homeless people use tobacco) derivatives of nicotine are used to treat Parkinson’s disease, improves short term energy, etc
There is in fact benefits to tobacco usage. You may claim benefits are not worth risk but that’s a different argument
I think that the carcinogen argument only goes so far. Because the risk is present but it can be reasonably mitigated. I don’t think anyone should chain smoke, certainly. But there’s a point at which I think well I could get mouth cancer, Lord forbid, from smoking a pipe with my brother every once and awhile-maybe once a week at most-or I could develop esophageal cancer from GERD, or lung cancer from the pollution in the Salt Lake Valley. Now, if I get cancer from smoking I’m going to wish that I didn’t smoke but I’m also going to say “okay, this is fair. I knew the risks involved.” But if I spend my entire life denying myself the pleasurable effects of nicotine in order not to develop cancer and I get cancer anyways, I’m going to be frustrated.
I think what I’m saying is that I don’t believe the effects of tobacco are direct and certain enough to make it inherently immoral. Like smoking meth is immoral because everyone I’ve ever known to smoke meth has ruined their lives. But you can use tobacco to where your chances of dying of anything else are still higher than cancer. Like honestly because of my temperament, I’m more likely to die of stress related illnesses which are relieved by tobacco.
Further more I would refute the natural law argument by saying it’s the administration of a drug. Just as sodomy is disordered but a suppository is not. And yes there is a health risk but as Trent said, a lot of medicine is just diluted poison. I take Concerta for my ADHD and that’s basically just time released micro-doses of meth and it does put me at risk of cardiovascular problems but the therapeutic effect it has on my executive dysfunction and my ability to get stuff done outweighs that.
The Bible contains multiple references to unnamed plants routinely burned as incense in spiritual contexts.
This feels less like an actual moral argumentation from Trent and more like a “I don’t like this and this is why it’s bad”
I don’t think this is a good argument, the mouth is often used to absorb medications. You can’t just say it wasn’t meant to do something when it indeed does serve a purpose.
I don't believe that smoking is inherently immoral. When it comes to substances its the abuse of the substance I regard as immoral. I define abuse as the use of the substance to satisfy a disordered desire. I havn't really delved deeply into this line of thought, but that's my surface level analysis.
I think addiction is the issue? For instance what about anything with added sugar?
Sure, that’s true in extreme cases. But we’re talk about smoking specifically. And at least with sugar it naturally occurs in the body, and you need some. Smoking literally has no intrinsic value or need
@@thewalruswasjason101average sugar intake is way worse than moderate smoking
In 1619 or 20, a Jesuit doctor in Macau, Fr. Johann Schreck (a student of and correspondent with prickly Galileo), conducted an autopsy on a Jesuit from the Japan mission who had died prematurely: he attributed the priest's damaged lungs to heavy smoking. So for 400 years the connection has been known clinically (let alone the knowledge by native Americans before that.) (Ironically, in the 1950s Pope Pius XII became alarmed at the rates of heavy smoking in the Jesuits, and instructed them to quit as inconsistent with the vow of poverty, and wanted them to not accept novices who smoked...)
When my father, whose own smoking father died of lung cancer, started medical school in London in 1950, at his very first class their lecturer told them that smokers got cancers that non-smokers don't and advised them strongly to quit ASAP. So that is about 75 years ago now. The jury was never out.
The flipside? There is a history of hundreds of years in the West of self-unaware nicotine addicts and commercial interests pushing loopholes and denials and bizarre attempts to sell an addiction as "freedom" (from these do-gooder people and nanny-state trying to tell you what to do.) But an addiction is not an exercise of freedom but of slavery. Smokers are particular suckers for forms of delivery that the sellers promise are slightly safer and therefore somehow actually a responsible choice, of course: filters, hookahs, bongs, cigars, etc.
B.t.w. The current advice on cigars? "Although cigar smokers have lower rates of lung cancer, coronary heart disease, and lung disease than cigarette smokers, they have higher rates of these diseases than those who do not smoke cigars. All cigar and cigarette smokers, whether or not they inhale, directly expose their lips, mouth, tongue, throat, and larynx to smoke and its toxic and cancer-causing chemicals. In addition, when saliva containing the chemicals in tobacco smoke is swallowed, the esophagus is exposed to carcinogens. These exposures probably account for the similar oral and esophageal cancer risks seen among cigar smokers and cigarette smokers." Cigar factsheet, National Cancer Institute
Matt's attempt at a cannabis/Jesus analogy is faulty. Substances like opium, mandrake, and even cannabis existed in Israel during Christ's time. While cannabis is believed to have originated from Mongolia and Southern Siberia, the cultural equivalents to wine from the Mediterranean would have been airag (3,000 years old) and kumis (2,500 years old). These drinks were commonly used at wedding celebrations. For instance, in Mongolia, the couple drinks airag from the same shumaa to signify unity, paralleling the symbolic use of wine in Jewish wedding traditions.
If Christ had incarnated in Asia, I think a closer analogy would have been consecrating tea instead of wine. I had heard that part of the point of using the bread and wine (besides its obvious ties to Passover) was that it was the common food and drink, making the Eucharist accessible to people (perhaps as opposed to having to use a lamb every Mass). I had also heard that wine was the common drink in those days because the alcohol content actually helped keep out certain germs that could be present if you drank water. In Asia tea became popular, and heating the water for tea also kills germs.
I know that the current rules are that the bread to be consecrated must be pure wheat bread, and the wine must be pure grape wine, but I once had a conversation with a priest who thinks this is a hardship in countries suited to other crops besides wheat and grapes. They end up having to import food in order to have Mass, which can be expensive for poor countries. He wished the rules could be relaxed so people could use their local grains and fruits for consecration. It makes some sense to me. I wonder whether that rule is infallible teaching and changing it would make the consecration invalid or if it is more of a discipline that could be changed. I also wonder when the tradition of using wheat and grapes began. I don't recall any Bible verses that say what kind of bread Jesus used for the Last Supper. Do we know a reason why it would have been wheat? Maybe that is what was used at Passover? I know barley loaves were eaten at the multiplication of the loaves miracle. Is there a reason we shouldn't at least be able to use barley also?
Blessed (soon to be Saint) Pier Giorgio Frassati smoked pipe tobacco
Saint Pius X smoked cigars
These are great topics! So thoughtful!
If smoking cigars is immoral, why haven’t the bishops condemned it? ;)
That’s the biggest dagger in the inmorality argument. Tobacco use, and smoking, has been around for Catholics for several hundred years. It’s not a new or novel moral issue. And yet the Church has been clearly permissive about it. The Church has never condemned smoking or tobacco, the theologians and manualists never decried it, and many saints, clerics, and popes smoked and used tobacco.
If this were a new issue, then yes the question would be more open. But the argument from silence is very strong when it’s been the silence is permissive for hundreds of years now.
@@CatholicSamurai That argument cuts both ways For most of history nobody knew how bad smoking was for you. It has always be wrong to abuse your body and your health, not only for practical reasons but also because our bodies are gifts from God that ought to be respected.
The argument from silence doesn't work because most of that silence happened before the better information about smoking's negative effects came out. In fact, the Church was equally silent during the push to eliminate smoking after its negative effects were exposed.
This isn't to say that I know for certain smoking is always and everywhere immoral, but recent research makes it a new issue and has opened a question that we must work to answer with faith and reason.
You don't want to apply this principle to a lot of moral issues it took the church centuries to go against.
"I hate that we disagree on this, because I know that your smarter than me and would beat me if we argued about it."
I love how Matt just concedes immediately. Why do people take him seriously? 😂
I'm gonna say Trents pretty wrong here. His argument is similar to saying it's immoral to eat lobster or another animal. Or to use salt because it has to be found and impacts cholesterol, its just knit picking stuff to label as immoral or sinful.
Not to mention, his argument or "lack of justification" is exactly what fundamentalists use to condemn alcohol. Whereas, the catholic faith absolutely does not condemn alcohol consumption nor do most christian denominations, because it is not inherently immoral
False, salt is a necessary ingredient to our lives. You’re coping be you don’t want to give up your vice. Why don’t you man up and be a little stronger
I love a good glass of wine and a cigar or pipe. I love Jesus more but even Our Lord made the best wine from water.
Also, it is different to do something privately than to do it publicly and thereby promote it.
As far as I know until the recent health fascists got in charge the Vatican had the highest % of smokers of any state, I also remember a phot of a bishops conference from the 50's, there was not one without a cigarette , cigar or pipe. So to sum up ' smoking is immoral' = 90 % of the clergy have been immoral for the past 500 years. I think not.
They’re not god. Man is sinful. Your straw man fails…
I presume these bishops did not want to criticize the speck of ash in smokers' eyes when they had the same mote in theirs? Not quite the attitude appropriate for pastors, but understandable... Time for a change.
Interesting talk. It blew my mind that green peppers had nicotine. Turns out lots of veggies do including potatoes, tomatoes, celery, cauliflower and eggplants. But they have it in extremely small amounts. A cigarette has between 6-28 milligrams of nicotine. A whole eggplant, which is supposed to have a lot for a vegetable, has between 0.0136-0.025 milligrams per eggplant depending on how big it is.
I think smoking is bad. It's not just about the person but the family members who they harm via second-hand smoke. My friends dad smoked all throughout her childhood - she always had issues with breathing that disappeared the second she moved out. Same with my dad. His father smoked, and he had constant issues with asthma. all of that disappeared the moment he moved out to get married. I think we just don't hold this predominantly male hobby to the same standard because dudes don't want to admit the negative affect they have on the health of those around them.
Serious question.
Following the logic he has on what’s “made for sexual pleasure,” is the Catholic stance on oral sex that it is sinful?
Yes.
Great topic. Thanks
Here's a more thought out response --> mattfradd.locals.com/post/6200826/cigars-and-christianity-why-moderation-makes-all-the-difference
I couldn't read it: how does he define "moderation?" If it is subjective, or excludes current medical recommendation (which is that there is no safe level of tobacco smoking, from the US NIH) then it may just be the addiction talking. Addicts think they are rational rather than merely rationalizing.
The most shocking part of this video is that australians call peppers Capsicum
I guess the Latinate culture is alive in a weird vestigial way
at 4:02 the answer is that there aren't any. All studies on smoking don't separate cigarettes, cigars and pipes. There was one I found a while ago where the researcher was trying use other studies to find out the difference in health risks between the types but they stopped citing that despite looking through hundreds of studies on smoking there was so little data on different types that they could only get so many worth while samples for their paper.
This is why if you smoke a cigar or pipe and is asked "do you smoke" by the doctor you should ALWAYS just lie and say no. If you say yes they'll act like you smoke 3 packs of cigarettes a day (cigarettes mind you are the worst and most unhealthy ways of using tobacco. Literally sucking on a fiberglass tube filled with artificial chemicals that have some tobacco sprinkled in it for flavor.)
Whenever tobacco is being discussed, cigars has to be separated out from cigarettes. They are not the same thing
Exactly. His whole argument is invalid not being honest with how different these products are and the reasons people generally partake in them. I thought he was smarter than that.
I’m a Catholic who is honestly not in good standing due to my romantic life. Other than that i try and live within Catholic boundaries. I smoke marijuana, and i don’t see a problem with that since were allowed to drink alcohol to have a good time going by the wedding at Cana.
Matt let Trent talllllllllk
I lack the patience to listen to people who are obsessed with health.
No smoking, no drinking, no fighting, no fun. Why are you so boring, Mr. Horn?
So much for the Pint, the pipe, and the Cross.
Every day here, literally every day I do this. Does anyone truly believe God disagrees with this with all the madness in the world?
@@denniskatinasyes. Evil is still evil no matter how small it is
@@JeffersonElder What evil? The evil you and others made up out of thin air? 30 Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength. 31 The second is this: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself. There is no commandment greater than these.” Just be a good man, don’t go crazy about detail while the world is burning.
@denniskatinas If those are the only applicable rules ever then God really went overboard with all 10 of the commandments huh?
@@DumplingRabbit Thats not the point. The point is that if you believe God is upset with you over smoking the pipe on your porch at the end of a long day, then you are lost in details. Someone smoking a pipe says nothing at all.
I appreciate the talk on smoking since it is definitely something worthy of discussing. I hope too hear something interesting soon!
That line of thinking begs the question whether receiving the Blood of Christ is immoral, since its accidents contain the poison of alcohol.
My stance is a bit complicated and I’m not good at summing it up. I am fine with Natural Tobacco use. But habitual or addictive use to me is Sin. We have to be managers of our facilities. I also feel we can’t use it for escapism. But rather just something to just do because you want to just do it. It also has to be legal usage.
This episode sucked
@@georgekaftan2000 maybe the one thing I somewhat agree with Trent on
Shouldn’t have inhaled, should only have puffed
Would love for Trent to do a whole video on this topic
Short answer: no!
Why is this even a question? Oh, I know. With Novous Ordo thinking, you have to speculate, trying to reinvent the wheel just like the protestants do.
The Traditional thinking is that smoking can be done in moderation. This also applies to drinking alcohol and even gambling.
The mouth wasn't designed for cigar smoke... I think you do have an issue of asking what is the mouth designed for.
I don't mean that in an antagonistic way, I mean does the mouth only exist for utility? Do you really need to kiss your wife to give her pleasure?
I'm not being a goofball. I'm simply pointint out the mouth of all body parts in its frankly infinite facets, its hard to really say what its well defined purpose is. It was not designed to consume medicine, and yet we can and are good to do so.
I wouldn't ascribe virtue to a cigar anymore than I would to benadryl or desert.
Bad diet kills most people, far more than substances, and yet we don't ascribe mortal sin to being 10% overweight, though it kills more people.
Just got to have a balanced view of things.
Commercial Cigarettes are horrible for you, I can't be near them because you inhale all this second hand smoke cigarette smokers are chugging those things. But cigars with my asthma... my body does not react badly to them, I don't know what to say beyond that. It reacts like I'm taking in nurishment. I at most smoke once a week, more commonly every other month, but my body responds very well to a cigar in that context.
So is welding wrong? Since my eyes werent designed to observe intense light? And my lungs werent designed to inhale weld fumes?
You don’t weld for pleasure, you earn a living by providing weld repairs or weld construction.
I could lay a better bead
I disagree with Trent but your argument i think can be easily argued you can within reason use safety equipment so your eyes and lungs are not easily damaged and it is wrong to choose to not use said safety equipment
@NoHomo1776 i don't have to weld, I can get a job doing anyhting.
That's not the purpose of welding
Honestly got me confused…so is it in the prudence of the person to decide? Or is there a clear line of yes/no?
I confess it in confession
Why? Pope Benedict loved Marlboros.
Pope St Pius X smoked
@@MrMustang13Didn't he live hundreds of years before the discovery of the Americas?
(I joke)
@@Malygosblues no, like the last Pope Benedict lol the one before Pope Francis
Edit: I see your joke lmao I get it lolol
LOL this guy is fine with marijuana in small amounts but against cigars?
Is "enjoyment" a positive ethical category when considering "gray areas"? (1 Cor 6:12)
[Referring to the comment about "proportional good" and "risk"]
When I tell people I can’t stand Trent Horn and they ask why I’m just going to show them this clip.
@@vinniecox874 «can't stand» is a weird way to write «love».
I can’t help but notice Trent’s wife became a natural healer or some such and now he’s taking a stand on moderate tobacco use