Theology of Food

fom4life · #1 Jun 16, '12, 9:30 am

Greetings,

A friend of mine on Facebook posed the following theological postion and i was wondering if the community of CAF has any thoughts or comments on the following. Again this is not my postion but one that i would like some intellegent answers to. Thanks in advance. My friend writes.......

Eating and drinking even to satiety for pleasure only, are not sinful, provided this does not stand in the way of health, since any natural appetite can licitly enjoy its own actions. [Condemned by Pope Innocent XI, March 4th, 1679]

I wish to make an argument (and I welcome any objections or corrections) that, simply speaking, eating confectionary desserts (read: sweets), in which the body neither requires or benefits from, is, at the very least, an imperfection, at th...e most, possibly a morally problematic action (depending on the circumstances of course). What do I mean? Basically this: to gratify the lower faculties, merely and exclusively for the purpose of sensual gratification, in which the consumption of confectionary delights afford, is clearly incompatible with Christian perfection. Am I saying pleasure is evil? Of course not, I am not a heretic. What I am suggesting is that the Christian who maximizes delectation through the indulgence in unnecessary food (e.g., sweets, ice cream, fudge, cake, etc.) is possibly making a bad judgment.

Let us look at this from another perspective. It has been said that smoking cigarettes is not a morally problematic issue until the health of the body becomes jeopardized, and then, the issue enters the moral arena by virtue of the responsibility to not willfully injure one's body. And, of course, this principle can be applied in many other areas as well. What about obesity? How is this any different? It isn't. I posit the moral position that if you find yourself engaged with this struggle of morbid obesity then you ipso facto are morally obligated to not sabotage and/or further exacerbate your condition through the indulgence in unnecessary foods that merely and exclusively gratify the lower faculties. I know, this sounds harsh or insensitive, but it really isn't. Think about it.

This is, in my private opinion, a moral problem that many of us refuse to look at.

GRATEFULONEjim · #2 Jun 16, '12, 9:47 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by fom4life

...eating confectionary desserts (read: sweets), in which the body neither requires or benefits from, is, at the very least, an imperfection, at th...e most, possibly a morally problematic action (depending on the circumstances of course). What I am suggesting is that the Christian who maximizes delectation through the indulgence in unnecessary food (e.g., sweets, ice cream, fudge, cake, etc.) is possibly making a bad judgment.

Maybe the body in its physical sense is not "benefitted" by consuming desserts and other similar delights, but the mind and the psycological impact such treats produce is of great benefit to the human psyche. It is not all about the physical condition of the body that is important.

meltzerboy · #3 Jun 16, '12, 11:59 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by fom4life

Greetings,

A friend of mine on Facebook posed the following theological postion and i was wondering if the community of CAF has any thoughts or comments on the following. Again this is not my postion but one that i would like some intellegent answers to. Thanks in advance. My friend writes.......

Eating and drinking even to satiety for pleasure only, are not sinful, provided this does not stand in the way of health, since any natural appetite can licitly enjoy its own actions. [Condemned by Pope Innocent XI, March 4th, 1679]

I wish to make an argument (and I welcome any objections or corrections) that, simply speaking, eating confectionary desserts (read: sweets), in which the body neither requires or benefits from, is, at the very least, an imperfection, at th...e most, possibly a morally problematic action (depending on the circumstances of course). What do I mean? Basically this: to gratify the lower faculties, merely and exclusively for the purpose of sensual gratification, in which the consumption of confectionary delights afford, is clearly incompatible with Christian perfection. Am I saying pleasure is evil? Of course not, I am not a heretic. What I am suggesting is that the Christian who maximizes delectation through the indulgence in unnecessary food (e.g., sweets, ice cream, fudge, cake, etc.) is possibly making a bad judgment.

Let us look at this from another perspective. It has been said that smoking cigarettes is not a morally problematic issue until the health of the body becomes jeopardized, and then, the issue enters the moral arena by virtue of the responsibility to not willfully injure one's body. And, of course, this principle can be applied in many other areas as well. What about obesity? How is this any different? It isn't. I posit the moral position that if you find yourself engaged with this struggle of morbid obesity then you ipso facto are morally obligated to not sabotage and/or further exacerbate your condition through the indulgence in unnecessary foods that merely and exclusively gratify the lower faculties. I know, this sounds harsh or insensitive, but it really isn't. Think about it.

This is, in my private opinion, a moral problem that many of us refuse to look at.

There is something to be said for personal responsibility in the food choices we make for ourselves and our families. At the same time, however, overeating, alcoholism, and drug abuse are all addictive behaviors, over which many people have little control and need outside intervention. Further, the lack of control, both physically and psychologically, increases over time.

exoflare · #4 Jun 16, '12, 12:04 pm

I also think (partly based on personal experience) that once you start overindulging on food/drinks, that habit of excessive self-gratification can start to bleed into other areas of your life as well.

Michael Mayo · #5 Jun 16, '12, 12:18 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by GRATEFULONEjim

Maybe the body in its physical sense is not "benefitted" by consuming desserts and other similar delights, but the mind and the psycological impact such treats produce is of great benefit to the human psyche. It is not all about the physical condition of the body that is important.

That is what I call soul food, in moderation, of course..

MidnightSun12 · #6 Jun 16, '12, 12:50 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by fom4life

Greetings,

A friend of mine on Facebook posed the following theological postion and i was wondering if the community of CAF has any thoughts or comments on the following. Again this is not my postion but one that i would like some intellegent answers to. Thanks in advance. My friend writes.......

Eating and drinking even to satiety for pleasure only, are not sinful, provided this does not stand in the way of health, since any natural appetite can licitly enjoy its own actions. [Condemned by Pope Innocent XI, March 4th, 1679]

I wish to make an argument (and I welcome any objections or corrections) that, simply speaking, eating confectionary desserts (read: sweets), in which the body neither requires or benefits from, is, at the very least, an imperfection, at th...e most, possibly a morally problematic action (depending on the circumstances of course). What do I mean? Basically this: to gratify the lower faculties, merely and exclusively for the purpose of sensual gratification, in which the consumption of confectionary delights afford, is clearly incompatible with Christian perfection. Am I saying pleasure is evil? Of course not, I am not a heretic. What I am suggesting is that the Christian who maximizes delectation through the indulgence in unnecessary food (e.g., sweets, ice cream, fudge, cake, etc.) is possibly making a bad judgment.

Let us look at this from another perspective. It has been said that smoking cigarettes is not a morally problematic issue until the health of the body becomes jeopardized, and then, the issue enters the moral arena by virtue of the responsibility to not willfully injure one's body. And, of course, this principle can be applied in many other areas as well. What about obesity? How is this any different? It isn't. I posit the moral position that if you find yourself engaged with this struggle of morbid obesity then you ipso facto are morally obligated to not sabotage and/or further exacerbate your condition through the indulgence in unnecessary foods that merely and exclusively gratify the lower faculties. I know, this sounds harsh or insensitive, but it really isn't. Think about it.

This is, in my private opinion, a moral problem that many of us refuse to look at.

Could you please post Pope Innocent's condemnation? I would be interested to read this.

I do not feel eating food for pleasure as a singular event is sinful in and of itself. If that was the case, why would Jesus have transformed the water into wine at the wedding feast when the water would have just as easily accomplished the task of quenching one's thirst?

That said, we know from the story of the rich man and Lazarus that the rich man went to hell at least partly because he ate "sumptously" every day. I think it's evident that gluttony is a sin of excess. For example, eating potato chips is not sinful in and of itself, but if you're eating potato chips every day then the frequency of consumption is what can make it sinful!

Equites Christi · #7 Jun 16, '12, 12:57 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by fom4life

Let us look at this from another perspective. It has been said that smoking cigarettes is not a morally problematic issue until the health of the body becomes jeopardized, and then, the issue enters the moral arena by virtue of the responsibility to not willfully injure one's body. And, of course, this principle can be applied in many other areas as well. What about obesity? How is this any different? It isn't. I posit the moral position that if you find yourself engaged with this struggle of morbid obesity then you ipso facto are morally obligated to not sabotage and/or further exacerbate your condition through the indulgence in unnecessary foods that merely and exclusively gratify the lower faculties. I know, this sounds harsh or insensitive, but it really isn't. Think about it.

Therefore, eating confectionary desserts should not be a morally problematic issue until the health of the body becomes jeopardized.

And there is a LOT of distance between eating a cream puff and being morbidly obese.

If you don't have a problem with cigarettes in healthy moderation, I can't imagine why on earth you'd have a problem with desserts in healthy moderation.