A couple of days ago my wife’s cousin, a Monsignor visiting from the East Coast, came by for lunch, and with him was a seminarian whom we’ll call John. Both my wife and I are facing health issues, so they performed a private Mass and anointing of the sick in our home. Now that’s a thing that doesn’t happen every day. I comported myself well, considering that I went to a Protestant church as a child. When we got to the recitation of the Lord’s Prayer, I was about to roll onward with those extra two or three lines that Protestants say, but caught myself in the nick of time :D. Not to mention other differences, like where Catholics say “forgive us our trespasses” but we said "forgive us our debts. But that’s a subject for another thread.
Anyway, John the seminarian smokes cigarettes and needed some. Although we don’t smoke, we offered to buy him some in the spirit of hospitality. He protested that we shouldn’t pay for a sin. I should mention that John is an engaging person who seems well up to date with current popular culture, and not a retiring monkish type as one might expect. At the same time it should be pointed out that seminarians, at least in his particular situation, have not taken their vows yet, so in many respects are like any other grad student.
This got me to wondering to wear something like smoking fits into the taxonomy of sin. Though not raised Catholic, I know a fair bit about it, first from having studied a lot of art history, and more importantly from having been married to one for 12 years. Does every transgression fit into the categories of the Seven Deadly Sins? I realize that the ‘deadly’ nature of a sin is not an isolated act of commission, but more a predisposition or habituation thereto. Physiologically, we know that smoking is a deadly habit over the long term, but how is it categorized theologically?
I suppose initially, it could be considered a form of self indulgence, which I think would be a form of gluttony. But if the smoker becomes addicted, what then? Is the failure to stop an example of sloth, because the smoker doesn’t muster up the necessary force of will?
I’m looking forward to other more knowledgeable replies to this question.
I don’t know about categorizing this in the Seven Sins, but deliberate self-injury (via smoking or otherwise) would be seen as sinful by RCs. The concept of body as temple (1 Corinthians 6:19 “Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit”) would ensure this.
If the leadership of the church has taken an official position on smoking, then that explains why a seminarian would be especially concerned about it. I think the prohibition of self-injury and self-murder is pretty much the norm for most religions, although there are certainly differences of interpretation. Our guests had no issue drinking the wine we served; while that clearly doesn’t present the same hazard as tobacco, many Protestant sects forbid alcohol altogether, on more or less the same body-as-temple principle.
I suppose it’s arguable that the exact type of sin depends on the situation. One can commit self-injury out of indulgence, but it’s also possible to do so out of anger towards someone or something, envy, or any of the others.
(A private Mass? Really? Are you sure it wasn’t some sort of prayer service?)
In the Catechism (bolding mine), smoking is mentioned as something to do temperately.
Respect for health
2288 Life and physical health are precious gifts entrusted to us by God. We must take reasonable care of them, taking into account the needs of others and the common good.
Concern for the health of its citizens requires that society help in the attainment of living-conditions that allow them to grow and reach maturity: food and clothing, housing, health care, basic education, employment, and social assistance.
2289 If morality requires respect for the life of the body, it does not make it an absolute value. It rejects a neo-pagan notion that tends to promote the cult of the body, to sacrifice everything for its sake, to idolize physical perfection and success at sports. By its selective preference of the strong over the weak, such a conception can lead to the perversion of human relationships.
2290 **The virtue of temperance disposes us to avoid every kind of excess: the abuse of food, alcohol, tobacco, or medicine. ** Those incur grave guilt who, by drunkenness or a love of speed, endanger their own and others’ safety on the road, at sea, or in the air.
2291 The use of drugs inflicts very grave damage on human health and life. Their use, except on strictly therapeutic grounds, is a grave offense. Clandestine production of and trafficking in drugs are scandalous practices. They constitute direct co-operation in evil, since they encourage people to practices gravely contrary to the moral law.
I’m pretty sure Smoking can be covered under ‘Lust’ for some. But aside from that, I remember growing up our priest smoked a pipe, the entire church would smell like Captain Black for weeks if he forgot and walked into the church with a lit pipe. I was born and raised Polish Catholic, I don’t know about the actual cannon law of smoking is, if there is one even.
Since priests have to say Mass at least once a day, many often will do so for friends and family. I gave a bottle of nice Uruguayan wine to a friend one time after a business trip and he reported to me the next day “Your wine was converted to the Blood of Christ last night.” His family had a priest friend over for dinner and a Mass broke out.
Absolutely it was a Mass. The cousin and student, who are visiting California on vacation*, showed up in casual vacation garb, the elder man in rumpled Dockers and the younger in the baggy cargo shorts so typical these days. But just before the ceremony the priest donned his vestments and we set up a small round table to be the altar. There were the customary readings from the Old and New Testaments, just as would be done in a church on this particular day, then anointing, and finally communion.
Did the priest actually perform the consecration? Or did he simply distribute already-consecrated Hosts that he had brought with him? If the latter, it wasn’t a mass. It was just a communion service (which is possibly what **gigi ** is getting at).
Seven “deadly” sins? Gotta love how language changes… uh, from a language to another… I’d never heard them called that. In Spanish they are the “capital” sins, as in “the ones that can be used as headings under which to file any other sin.”
Yes, every sin can be classified into one of the seven, but in this case, the sin is much more easily classified into the ten: Thou Shalt Not Kill - either yourself or others. Since it’s by ingesting and forcing others to ingest something which is bad in excess (it just so happens that the “excess” is quite low), it could be classed as Gluttony; since it’s because that ingestion causes pleasure, it could be classed as Lust.
My First Communion took place “in the domestic chapel” (i.e., in my parents’ living room) because Mom didn’t want my no-church-going, 8 months younger cousin to have it first… which is at the very least a sin of Pride, but also confirmation that private Masses aren’t something so rare. I guess all the Masses my High School’s Mountaineering Club has held on mountainpeaks count as private too (they needed the same permit from the Bishop), but of course anybody who happened by was welcome to take part.
I have a nephew who is a priest, and I never heard that smoking was a sin. It could be that a penance he was given made it so for him.
A priest can say mass and consecrate the host and say an actual mass out side the church and some chaplins did during the war. Even if there were only 3 Catholics in the unit.
I know many Catholic priests I worked for some and made meals for visiting priests when I was Catholic, and most of them smoked.
As a post script to my last answer, I also made a vestment for a retired priest who said mass for himself in his home. He had a small alter in his living room.
Smoking is not a Sin. At all, although it’s not reccomended (at least via cigarettes) and if you really were doing to kill yourself it’s very bad, although extremely weird.
The Seven Capital Sins (more dramatically known as the Seven Deadly) are not actually sins. They are emotional needs or states which are recognized as unhealthy and which directly lead to sin unless controlled. Simply being angry or randy or proud isn’t inherently evil, but you are very likely to slip into arrogance or cruelty or sexual sins and whatnot.
PS: I’ve never understood why some Protestants say “Forgive us our debts.” True, both words (Debts and Trespasses) are metaphorical, but it always seemed like an odd way to say it. I may have to start another GQ on that.
A permit from the Bishop might be one thing, but it’s my understanding that the sacrament of the Eucharist takes place in a consecrated space and not just ad hoc in anyone’s home.
If by ‘concecrating’ you mean blessing the oil, water, and wine, then yes, he did do that. In fact, the olive oil and water was supplied by us, though he did bring his own wine.
No, I believe you can celebrate the Mass almost anywhere. My brother-in-law the bishop (at least, he will be consecrated as a bishop in a couple of weeks) celebrates the Mass every day. He has done so in my mother-in-law’s house on many occasions.
“Tresspass” is used in the sense of “wrong another”, not the modern sense of “being on someone else’s land”.
If you wrong another, you owe him a debt. It’s not really any different.
“Debts” is actually the “original” version- it’s from the 1400-ish Wycliffe translation (of the Bible). “Tresspasses” came later, in an Anglican prayer book.
ETA: I have no idea what the words used in the Latin and Aramaic versions are. Or Greek.
[108.] “The celebration of the Eucharist is to be carried out in a sacred place, unless in a particular case necessity requires otherwise. In this case the celebration must be in a decent place.”[197] The diocesan Bishop shall be the judge for his diocese concerning this necessity, on a case-by-case basis.
[197]Code of Canon Law, can. 932 § 1; S. Congregation for Divine Worship, Instruction, Liturgicae instaurationes, n. 9: AAS 62 (1970) p. 701.
Can. 932 §1. The eucharistic celebration is to be carried out in a sacred place unless in a particular case necessity requires otherwise; in such a case the celebration must be done in a decent place.
§2. The eucharistic sacrifice must be carried out on a dedicated or blessed altar; outside a sacred place a suitable table can be used, always with a cloth and a corporal.
So, you can celebrate “almost anywhere” decent if it’s a necessity. Of course, we had Mass in the gym at school which may not have been a necessity either, but I’m hoping they at least consulted the bishop about it.
I’d suspect the consultation is observed in practice only when it will be a relatively large/public/open Mass (I guess potential for scandal or tacky/indecent appearances are larger there).
I’ve never heard of a priest requesting permission to say Mass in a private home for friends/family, and it seems to happen reasonably frequently.