[Question]{.underline}: Is it a sin to smoke tobacco?
[Answer]{.underline}: The answer to this question, frequently posed by smokers, ought not to be an emotional one, inspired either by the advertising of tobacco companies or by the politically correct propaganda against smoking.
There can be no doubt that smoking is a serious risk to health and that all kinds of smoking produce a very significant increase in the risk of developing a whole range of different illnesses, including various cancers, emphysema, peripheral vascular and cardiovascular disease, to mention just a few. It is also a recognized principle of moral theology that we are stewards of our bodies, for God alone has ultimate and absolute right and control over the human body and soul. Consequently we do not have the right to deliberately cause any harm to the body, let alone a harm that could well shorten life.
However, a distinction has to be made between the very grievous sin of directly causing harm or death to oneself ( = suicide), and the other and completely different situation of allowing, but not directly producing, some harm, illness, or death to befall one. For this is not intrinsically evil, and can even be permissible and not even a sin at all, if it is done for a proportionately grave reason, such as for one’s own spiritual good, or that of another. Missionaries regularly exposed themselves to the danger of physical death for the salvation of souls, and are greatly praised for doing so.
The resolution as to whether or not it is a sin to smoke depends, consequently, on how proximate the danger of death really is, and how grave a reason exists to maintain this habit (cf. Prummer, Man. Th. Moralis, II, §113). Since many smokers fall ill and die from entirely unrelated illnesses, and since it is only a statistical “risk” of serious illness and death that smokers necessarily incur, so that many are not seriously affected in their health by smoking, it can certainly be argued that the danger to health and the danger of death are not proximate. This is particularly the case when the consumption of tobacco is moderate in quantity. In such a case a relatively light reason would suffice for it not to be even a venial sin. Such a reason would be the fact that it helps a person to relax, to dispel tension, frustration, anger, or that the nicotine helps to keep him awake or more motivated to do his duties. It could also be the fact that a person who has become addicted to tobacco finds it impossible to control his depression, anxiety, or annoyance if he does not smoke. However, the person who would smoke without any reason at all, thus exposing himself to a remote risk of serious illness and death, could not be considered exempt from venial sin. Likewise would be the situation of the person who would smoke out of the pure pleasure of it. However, in the frequent case of the smoker who enjoys smoking, but who does not do it for pure pleasure, but rather to calm his nerves, there is a reasonable cause to place himself at remote risk, and it is consequently not necessarily even a venial sin.
Nevertheless, the situation is quite different for those persons in whom the danger of serious illness or death is not remote, but proximate. This is the case for those persons who are already suffering from tobacco-induced diseases, such as emphysema or cardiovascular disease. For them to continue smoking and consequently to aggravate the proximate risk of further disease or death is a serious sin, and could even be a mortal sin if there were no serious reason to smoke, and if the danger of further illness were truly proximate. Such persons abuse the body that God has given them, and must cease smoking even at the great cost of the difficulty of breaking an engrained habit.
There is a further complication of smoking. Being a public behavior that is in general dangerous to health, every person who smokes gives bad example to others, and implicitly, at least encourages the same behavior in them. When it is a self-indulgence, without any real or proportionate reason, as is usually the case, it is consequently a lack of charity and concern for others. Furthermore, even when the example is not followed, there is also the danger to others’ health from prolonged exposure to second-hand smoke in confined spaces, such as vehicles and apartments. It is neither considerate nor reasonable to expose others to this danger, although it is not nearly so great as the danger to oneself.
Answered by Father Peter Scott, SSPX.