Is eating for the mere pleasure of the experience really a sin of gluttony? Can someone explained boundaries of this?


Is eating for the mere pleasure of the experience really a sin of gluttony? Can someone explained boundaries of this? According to this site in the 7th line:

Does that mean things like soda or sauces (since they don’t have nutritional value/ empty calories) a sin of gluttony?


If you eat to the point of wasting food its a sin I believe. This is especially easy to do with junk food like soda. They offer no nutritional value, they are produced purely to allow people to eat for pleasure, and they are addictive (kind of like mas********n). So I think buying junk food is a waste of valuable resources, and they should be avoided as much as possible not just for the health issues.
The catechism doesn’t say much on gluttony so you should trust your conscience in this case and eat at your discretion. Gluttony usually refers to the lack of self control. If you can easily restrain from overeating and stopping before your limit I think you will be fine :slight_smile:


Not always…We know from the Book of James that God never tempts us…so look at Isaiah 25:6.


It would depend on intention and circumstance for it to be a sin.

If one has a desire for expensive, frivolous, hoards of food to feast on, I could see that being sinful.

If one wants to taste a different food in moderation then there is nothing wrong with that. After all there is a pleasure in moderate eating that is ok.


If by eating you’re exceeding your healthy BMI and Body Fat Percentage, this could be a problem. Really, it’s only a problem because it can negatively impact your health.


Doing anything merely for the sake of pleasure is sinful. The reason is that pleasure takes its moral quality from the object it is taken in (thus taking pleasure in good is good, and taking pleasure in evil is evil). Since pleasure as such is neither good nor evil, it is always disordered to act merely for the sake of pleasure.


Is this backed by the Catechism?


I don’t have a Catechism reference offhand. Here is a reference to Fr. Prummer’s classic Handbook of Moral Theology, which cites both Aquinas and the condemnations of Innocent XI. (top paragraph of p. 23)


Am I allowed desert? It tastes good but I don’t really need it… Can I have a glass of wine because it tastes good?


Pleasure as such, as you say, is morally neutral. I highly doubt that it is ever sinful, as you seem to say, to do that which is morally neutral. Might as well.say that ir is a sin to wear clothes or something.

Remember Christ was accused of being a glutton and a drunk. Untrue, but it does inply that he took pleasure in food and drink and was not puritanical about it.


Depends what you mean by eating for mere pleasure of the experience.

Consider many people love to cook 1) for the joy of cooking and learning and trying new things, 2) To experience/share with others.

These two reasons are great ways to practice virtue. I love cooking and trying different ideas, and one of the things I realize when I do it is how amazing God is with what he gave us and what we can do with those things.

I love sharing these things (even things as simple as grilled cheese – I make the best) and seeing how much people enjoy them.

I always think of the traditional grandmother who has mastered cooking and cooks for her entire family and grandkids because she loves them so much – not only to put food in their stomachs, but so that they will really enjoy what they eat.

Gluttony, however, is excess. When we go beyond what we should. This could include drunkenness which is multi-layered.

As Catholics, it is good to practice patience, abstinence, and sacrifice for the sake of suffering and not becoming too comfortable.


Off the top of my head, only John the Baptist ate locusts and honey. I think everyone else consumed food for some enjoyment. They probably used salt. I would imagine that Christ probably indulged from time to time on spices, exotic foods, and drink other than water and milk.

I think moderation is the key.


I should add that our understanding of “gluttony” has changed since ancient times, when gluttony and addiction were seen as synonymous. It’s not to say that gluttony doesn’t exist, but we know a lot more about the physiological nature of addiction and treat it as a mental health condition.


You misinterpreted me.

Pleasure is only good insofar as it is taken in something good. So to seek pleasure for its own sake involves a disorder of the will, since the will is thereby inclined to an indifferent object without reference to the good.

Taking pleasure in that which is good is of course good.


Something cannot be both disordered and morally neutral at the same time, unless one is referring to a natural rather than moral disorder. Natural disorders such as illness, of course, raise no questions of sin.


Had he eaten the locusts raw I’d forgive him; however, he added HONEY :honey_pot:

Was he adding the honey to increase the nutrition of his crunchy feast? Or did he enjoy the honey?:frowning:



I was thinking the same thing about the honey when I wrote it.


I like honey :honey_pot: with my biscuits… :cold_sweat:


Things can only be morally indifferent in the abstract. Human acts can only be morally good or bad in the concrete, by reason of being at least implicitly referred to God or not.


So basically we need to eat for nutritional value or fellowship value. Eating pleasurable foods such as wine is acceptable during times of celebration and social meetings. Drinking a whole bottle of lets say diet soda by yourself for the mere pleasure might be a sin of gluttony.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit