§ V. On Gluttony

I. Notion. Gluttony, taken generally, is the inordinate appetite either for food or non-intoxicating drink, or for intoxicating drink.

II. Division. Gluttony, taken generally, comprises gluttony strictly so called, or excess in eating and drinking, and drunkenness.

III. Gluttony strictly so called. 1. Notion. Gluttony strictly so called, or excess in eating and drinking, as has already been said, is the inordinate appetite for food or non-intoxicating drink; it is opposed to abstinence.

2. Morality. Gluttony per se, i.e., insofar as it is opposed to abstinence, is venial. The reason is that it involves excess in a thing indifferent in itself. It becomes mortal, for example, if someone gravely harms his health, if from gluttony he becomes unequal to sustaining his family or paying his debts (St. Alphonsus, V, 73).

Corollary I. Gluttony is not a grave sin even when someone eats or drinks to the point of vomiting. It is doubted whether those sin gravely who purposely vomit what they have taken, so that they may eat and drink again. Several affirm it, because that seems to involve great deformity against rational nature. But gluttony by reason of itself is never forbidden under mortal sin; nor is it clearly seen that by a deformity greater only in degree another species of sin is introduced.

Corollary II. The eating of human flesh or blood seems to be a grave sin. For an act of this kind, at least according to common estimation, redounds upon the person of the deceased, and therefore is opposed to observance, insofar as this virtue extends itself in some way to all; moreover, that it is gravely opposed is clear from the very nature of this act. The contrary must be said if someone eats human flesh from necessity.

IV. Drunkenness. 1. Notion. Drunkenness is the inordinate appetite for intoxicating drink; it is opposed to sobriety.

2. Division. Drunkenness is distinguished:

a) Into perfect and imperfect, according as reason is wholly or not wholly disturbed.

b) Into direct and indirect. It is direct when the intoxicating act, insofar as it is such, is intended as an end or is assumed as a means by which another end is obtained. Otherwise it is indirect.

3. Morality. a) Perfect and direct drunkenness is a grave sin, at least if it is induced for a notable time. This is clear: 1. from Sacred Scripture, which excludes drunkards from heaven;¹ 2. from reason; for a grave disorder is contained in an act which induces deprivation of the actual use of reason, indeed even of the proximate faculty of using reason for every sudden necessity; a deprivation, I say, which subsists in so unnatural a manner (St. Alphonsus, V, 75, 76). Now the unnatural manner consists in this, that the lower powers operate without reason directing them.² Therefore the malice of drunkenness is not found precisely from the deprivation of the actual use of reason - for this also has place in sleep - but from the said deprivation subsisting in such a manner. Nevertheless, according to most authors drunkenness is not mortal "if it deprives one of reason for a short time. But La Croix says that a long time seems to be one hour" (St. Alphonsus, V, 75). But this observation is of lesser importance, because a slight duration of drunkenness commonly cannot be foreseen.

b) Perfect and indirect drunkenness likewise is per se gravely illicit; but for a proportionate cause it is licit, if the end cannot be obtained by a more harmless means. The reason for the former is that it is per se gravely illicit to posit a cause from which a gravely evil effect will follow, such as the deprivation of the use of reason while the lower powers are operating. The latter follows from what was said concerning a cause with a double effect (St. Alphonsus, V, 76; cf. St. Thomas, I-II, q. 88, a. 5, ad 1; II-II, q. 150, a. 3, ad 3).

c) Imperfect and direct drunkenness of itself is only venial, because in it the lower powers are not simply deprived of the guidance of reason. It can become mortal, for example, on account of harms to the family that will follow, on account of foreseen blasphemies, on account of grave scandal that will arise, etc.

Likewise, imperfect and indirect drunkenness is per se venial; for a just cause it is licit, if the end cannot be obtained by a more harmless means.

d) Finally, alcoholism, as it is called, must be very greatly condemned, since it harms the health of the body, gradually dulls the mind, incites to venereal things, extinguishes religious and moral sentiments, and takes away the happiness and prosperity of the family. Add that alcoholics not rarely beget children who are prone to venereal things, labor under abnormal affections, or are even exposed to the danger of mental deficiency. Hence the remedies, concerning which we shall speak under VI, should be diligently inculcated upon those given to alcoholism.

Corollary I. With the required conditions posited, it is licit to make oneself drunk to expel disease, or to lessen grave pains to be undergone in a surgical operation. The reason is that the act of drinking is not chosen insofar as it is intoxicating, but insofar as it is healing. I said, "with the required conditions posited," because to lessen pains a more natural means can commonly be used just as safely, and therefore must be used in preference to drunkenness, for example, ether taken by inhalation. Driving away melancholy does not constitute a sufficient cause (St. Alphonsus, V, 76, q. 1; cf. St. Thomas, cited place).

It is disputed whether it is licit for someone to make himself drunk in order to avoid death with which another threatens him unless he becomes drunk. Several affirm it, but with St. Alphonsus (V, 76, q. 2) it seems this must be denied, because evils are not to be done that goods may come. But in the hypothesis posited the act of drinking is evil. The reason is that the act of drinking is evil when it has no other effect than drunkenness; and this obtains in the case, because immunity from death is not an effect of the act of drinking itself.

Corollary II. For a grave cause it is licit to give another an occasion of making himself drunk; likewise it is licit to induce another to drunkenness so that he may be impeded from a greater evil, for example, from homicide (St. Alphonsus, V, 77; II, 57). These things will be further explained and proved in the treatise on charity.

Corollary III. Sins committed in drunkenness are imputed according to what was said in n. 60. By most authors insults against men are excepted, because they are usually reckoned as nothing. The contrary seems to be said of blasphemies, because the honor of God seems to demand that they be forestalled; likewise the contrary must be said of obscene words, by reason of scandal, and of defamation of one's neighbor, by reason of the harm that will arise (St. Alphonsus, V, 78).

¹ Gal. 5:21.

² This does not happen of itself in sleep or after the use, for example, of morphine; besides, sleep deprives one only of the use of reason, but not of the proximate faculty of using it, because a sleeping person can immediately be aroused from sleep.

V. The daughters of gluttony are: 1. dullness of mind; 2. foolish merriment; 3. much talking; 4. buffoonery; 5. uncleanness of body (St. Thomas, II-II, q. 148, a. 6; St. Alphonsus, V, 74).

VI. Remedies of gluttony, especially of drunkenness. 1. Consider its very evil effects. 2. Flee occasions. 3. Exercise sobriety, even by sometimes withdrawing from the appetite things which are licit. Especially let heavy drinkers be advised to enroll in a society instituted for promoting sobriety.¹ Let habitual drunkards be required to abstain entirely from intoxicating liquor, because moderate use is morally impossible for them.

On the use of chloroform, morphine, etc., consult the treatise on charity toward oneself.

¹ Societies of this kind have more than once been approved by the Holy See and enriched with indulgences (cf. Acta Apostolicae Sedis, 6 May 1914; 12 June 1914).