In my opinion, the line often crosses where a person can already choose, but does not want to. I remember how an acquaintance drank every night "due to stress" and then excused himself that it was an illness. The father in the church told us simply - if you can stop for fasting, then it is not just an illness. And what do you think, where exactly is this border?
I agree with you, Boris. My husband, God forgive him, also made excuses for "nerves" until he stopped for Lent one year - then he realized he could. In my opinion, the limit is where a person already lies to himself and to God. What do you think, did your father say anything else about it?
I also had a friend who drank a glass every evening “out of nerves,” and in confession he said, “I’m sick, father, I can’t do anything.” And when Great Lent came, he took it and endured it without a single drop. So, there was still a choice. Thank you for reminding me of these stories, you spot them exactly.
My son-in-law used to say the same thing about drinking "due to work pressure". But when I told him to try cutting it for Lent, he did it without a problem. So your priest was right – if you can stop for God, it's not just an illness.
I also had such a case with one colleague in the kitchen - every evening there was a glass of wine “out of fatigue,” but at confession it was all “illness.” And just like Lent, I calmly endured two weeks. This means that the fathers are right: where there is a choice for the sake of God, there is no longer only illness. Thank you for these stories, exactly to the point.
