Harsh language advisory as to the above video. (It is Gordon Ramsey after all.)
The Babylon Bee tackles the big issues:
In our “Pastors Weigh In” column, we ask a wide range of prominent pastors important questions regarding theology and Christian living. Today, our panel of pastoral consultants weighs in on this question:
“Does pineapple belong on pizza?”
Rob Bell: Pineapple. Pineapple rolling in the depths of the human soul. Souls that long. Souls that pine. Souls that yearn to be one with the eternal “god” spirit of the earth. Buy my book.
Bob the Tomato: As long as there’s no tomato sauce, you savages.
Joel Osteen: Yes, pineapple belongs on pizza, as all good teachers of God’s Word know. Live a victorious life and slap that pineapple right on that pizza!
Paul Washer: You will feel the mighty wrath of God the Father burning upon you for all eternity as you enjoy your pineapple pizza IN HELL.
John MacArthur: No.
Phil Johnson: Whatever John said.
Robert Jeffress: I’ve never seen President Trump eat pineapple on pizza. He eats it with a fork and knife, though, so that’s definitely the way all Christians should consume pizza. MAGA!
Matt Chandler: I want you to hear this. Are you tracking with me? Good. Pineapple for the glory of God, combined with pizza for the glory of God, is the most powerful force for advancing the kingdom of God on this earth. DID YOU TRACK WITH ME? (Ed. note: at this point in our interview, Chandler tragically knocked himself out with his own wild arm gesticulations. Please keep him in your thoughts and prayers.)
Pope Francis: Pineapples and pizza both contribute to flatulence and climate change and should be avoided. If you do enjoy pineapple pizza, you can purchase an indulgence/carbon credit from the Vatican for a discount this week only. Act fast!
Go here to read the rest. Personally myself I think that people who would profane pizza with items like pineapple should be bound and left to gnash their teeth pizzaless forever in the outer darkness. However, when it comes to pizza my opinions may verge on the fanatic. Let us consult the Angelic Doctor:
Article 1. Whether gluttony is a sin?
Objection 1. It would seem that gluttony is not a sin. For our Lord said (Matthew 15:11): “Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man.” Now gluttony regards food which goes into a man. Therefore, since every sin defiles a man, it seems that gluttony is not a sin.
Objection 2. Further, “No man sins in what he cannot avoid” [Ep. lxxi, ad Lucin.]. Now gluttony is immoderation in food; and man cannot avoid this, for Gregory says (Moral. xxx, 18): “Since in eating pleasure and necessity go together, we fail to discern between the call of necessity and the seduction of pleasure,” and Augustine says (Confess. x, 31): “Who is it, Lord, that does not eat a little more than necessary?” Therefore gluttony is not a sin.
On the contrary, Gregory says (Moral. xxx, 18) that “unless we first tame the enemy dwelling within us, namely our gluttonous appetite, we have not even stood up to engage in the spiritual combat.” But man’s inward enemy is sin. Therefore gluttony is a sin.
I answer that, Gluttony denotes, not any desire of eating and drinking, but an inordinate desire. Now desire is said to be inordinate through leaving the order of reason, wherein the good of moral virtue consists: and a thing is said to be a sin through being contrary to virtue. Wherefore it is evident that gluttony is a sin.
Reply to Objection 1. That which goes into man by way of food, by reason of its substance and nature, does not defile a man spiritually. But the Jews, against whom our Lord is speaking, and the Manichees deemed certain foods to make a man unclean, not on account of their signification, but by reason of their nature [Cf. I-II:102:6 ad 1]. It is the inordinate desire of food that defiles a man spiritually.
Reply to Objection 2. As stated above, the vice of gluttony does not regard the substance of food, but in the desire thereof not being regulated by reason. Wherefore if a man exceed in quantity of food, not from desire of food, but through deeming it necessary to him, this pertains, not to gluttony, but to some kind of inexperience. It is a case of gluttony only when a man knowingly exceeds the measure in eating, from a desire for the pleasures of the palate.
Reply to Objection 3. The appetite is twofold. There is the natural appetite, which belongs to the powers of the vegetal soul. On these powers virtue and vice are impossible, since they cannot be subject to reason; wherefore the appetitive power is differentiated from the powers of secretion, digestion, and excretion, and to it hunger and thirst are to be referred. Besides this there is another, the sensitive appetite, and it is in the concupiscence of this appetite that the vice of gluttony consists. Hence the first movement of gluttony denotes inordinateness in the sensitive appetite, and this is not without sin.
There you have it. If the desire to put pineapple, shudder, on pizza is an inordinate desire, it is gluttony and to be condemned. I can’t say it is inordinate; perverse, yes, but not inordinate. What say you?