I have been Catholic all of my life and have never fully understood the purpose of not eating meat on Fridays during lent. I understand that it is supposed to be a sacrafice, but it doesn't make sense that in the eyes of the church I would be a better catholic if I ate a lobster dinner than a ham sandwich. TO me that makes no sense. Who's to say that this wasn't a rule put in way back to help struggling fisherman increase their sales? If a person is a vegitarian this does not apply to them at all. I for one think this is a very dated "tradition" that needs to be eliminated. I think it would be better to encourage people to sacrafice something that is meaningful.

I would love for someone to exmplain to me how they feel about this. Will I burn in hell if I have a turkey sandwich on Fri when my fellow "good catholics" go to the local fish fry and splurge on deep fried cod.

Help me understand.

-- I. Ben Thinking (Curious@hotmail.com), March 13, 2003

Answers

Dear I. Ben Thinking,

Before Vatican II, Catholics use to make the sacrafice not eating meat on all Fridays. After Vatican II, they changed it just to the Fridays of Lent.

We throughout the Scriptures and Tradition to sacrifice something to God. This is a form of penence due to our sins. This is practice was not set up to help the fishermen. I recommend "Fish On Fridays" by Fr. Feeney.

Mark

-- Mark Trieger (trieger4@earthlink.net), March 13, 2003.

You never gave me your thoughts on the whole ham sandwich vs. lobster dinner point. You as well as I know many Catholics who will attend a local fish fry (hardly a sacrifice) that will look down there nose at anyone who would dream about frying up some spam on a Fri. night during lent. Is this the intent? Who is the better Catholic, the Crab leg eater or the bologna eater? I'm being humorous, but I am trying to make a point to see what you think. Help me understand.

-- I Ben Thinking (Curious@hotmail.com), March 14, 2003.

Catholics abstain from eating meat as part of their spiritual life for three reasons:

1.) To practise repentance - the act of showing remorse or contrition for past sins and offering atonement to God for same.

2.) Jesus asked us to. Scripture tells us that the path to salvation is very narrow. To assist in our salvation Jesus asked us to demonstrate our repentance for sin in part, by fasting after he left us (Luke 5:35).

3.) We are asked to carry out this sacrifice in remembrance of Jesus’ passion and death - His sacrifice for us (you might compare it to offering a moment of silence on Remembrance Day for those who have given their life for us).

The Church, as God’s custodian here on earth has decreed that we shall fast and abstain from eating meat at certain times. Meat is considered to be the flesh and organs of mammals and fowl. An additional benefit to fasting and abstention from eating meat is that the inconvenience and/or suffering incurred, can be offered up for the sake of others.

-- Ed Lauzon (grader@accglobal.net), March 14, 2003.

I Ben,

I would like to add what Ed wrote to make some points more explicit. What is the purpose of abstaining from meat on Friday? On Good Friday, Christ gave up His flesh for us on the Cross of Calvary. On all Fridays, Catholics (and all Christians) can use Friday as a day to recall this sacrifice. In the same way, we recall His Resurrection on Easter each Sunday.

Christ gives up His flesh...we perform a small act of self-denial (giving up eating meat) on Fridays to unite us to His sacrifice. It's easier to make the connection in the Romance Languages because a single word is used for both terms "flesh" and "meat."

The entire 40 days of Lent should be penitential. It is a time for us believers to die to ourselves and unite ourselves with Christ. Local customs in Catholic areas often replace meat wirh fish or something else on a Friday. People shouldn't be stuffing fish down their throats (we should abstain from meat and fast). Fasting=two small meals/snacks and one regular meal.

If you wonder about the people who "splurge" on fish, a more interesting concern is for those who go crazy during the days before Ash Wednesday. In the U.S. (Louisiana), we have Marti Gras. In South America and Europe, they have Carnival (literally meaning ~ "leaving behind the flesh"). The idea is that Carnival marks the time when we leave the flesh; but some people really hold onto the flesh (so to speak) during the days before Ash Wednesday.

You write:

"I for one think this is a very dated "tradition" that needs to be eliminated. I think it would be better to encourage people to sacrifice something that is meaningful."

Before ~1960, people abstained from meat each Friday during the entire year. Today, you will be happy to know that those Catholics who do not wish to continue abstaining from meat thoughout the year are encouraged to sacrifice something else, just as you wish.

The Church asks from us very little. As a contrast, Islam requires fasting (sunup to sundown) for an entire month...that means no food or drink (other than water) for an entire month during daylight hours.

I encourage you to use the same motivation that caused you to ask this question and direct it toward yourself. Find a sacrifice that is meaningful to you. Not in place of, but in addition to your Lenten fasting and abstinence.

God bless you,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), March 14, 2003.

You both make valid points and I 100% agree with your statments. However, maybe you could answer a direct question for me then. If I were stranded on a desert island and it was a Friday during lent and I had two choices of meals presented to me, one being Lobster with lots of melted butter and the other being a bologan sandwich, which choice would be the better one to make? Again, I'm trying to keep light in the conversation, but a serious question non the less. I am not challenging anyone's faith, I'm merely trying to create interesting discussion. Input appreciated.

-- I. Ben Thinking (Curious@hotmail.com), March 14, 2003.

I Ben Thinking,

The point in all of this, in making sacrifice for atonement of sin, is to become more holy, to become more like Christ. If you are going to be honest in this effort then your actions should reflect characteristics that Jesus was known to have, more particularly, they should demonstrate sincerity, honesty and humility. With this in mind, then your decision between the lobster and the bologna is made easy. You cannot have the meat - it is forbidden. You may have the lobster. However, you are to be guided by the Church’s guidelines in this area. As mentioned recently in another thread, when fasting, at the most, one should have a modest meal as the main meal of the day and two smaller meals, which together, do not add up to one normal meal. Therefore, go ahead and have the lobster - but have it in moderation. In doing so, you will be 1.) practising repentance by offering atonement to God by not eating what you wish and going without, 2.) doing what Jesus asked of you - to fast. 3.) remembering and honouring the sacrifice Jesus made for you.

-- Ed Lauzon (grader@accglobal.net), March 14, 2003.

Now that you introduced more variables to our equation...ie: the deserted island. You would be in danger of death and you would eat what you could to survive not matter the season, no matter the food, no matter what. Your question is really about how can I make a good sacrifice. Of course, as many people have explained, meat on Friday's during Lent (under normal circumstances) is abstained from. Fasting is also a requirement during Friday's of Lent, so those who do gorge themselves at the all you can eat Red Lobster or local Knights of Columbus Fish Fry are not following the proscription either. The point is to sacrifice something. That sacrifice is supposed to make you a bit uncomfortable because maybe, just maybe, Jesus was a bit uncomfortable, hanging naked on a cross in front of family, disciples, strangers and between 2 theives....on a Friday--FOR YOU (and me and all who read this)

-- patrick farley (pfarley@saintmeinrad.edu), March 15, 2003.

Jmj
Hello, folks.

It has been interesting to read the good replies to IBT. However, there was one error and (and then repeated by another person), so I would like to make a correction now.

One person said: "The entire 40 days of Lent should be penitential. It is a time for us believers to die to ourselves and unite ourselves with Christ. Local customs in Catholic areas often replace meat wirh fish or something else on a Friday. People shouldn't be stuffing fish down their throats (we should abstain from meat and fast). Fasting = two small meals/snacks and one regular meal."

The above implies that fasting is required on each Friday during Lent.

This was more explicitly stated by another person later:
"... meat on Friday's during Lent (under normal circumstances) is abstained from. Fasting is also a requirement during Fridays of Lent, so those who do gorge themselves at the all you can eat Red Lobster or local Knights of Columbus Fish Fry are not following the proscription either."

The truth is actually that, at this time in (Western/Latin) Catholic Church history, there are only two days on the entire liturgical calendar on which we are obliged to fast:
Ash Wednesday and Good Friday.
We are encouraged to fast voluntarily, on days of our choice, throughout the rest of the year. Some people fast voluntarily on each Friday in Lent, others on each Friday of the whole year, others not at all.

Oh, I just remembered one other thing ...
We are required to abstain from meat on all Fridays during Lent.
Concerning Fridays outside of Lent, one person wrote: "... those Catholics who do not wish to continue abstaining from meat [on Fridays] thoughout the year are encouraged to sacrifice something else ..."
Actually these people are not just "encouraged," but are required on every Friday of the year to do something else (of their choice) in the area of mortification, charity, self-denial. Due to an oversight on the part of the many bishops and priests who don't remember to mention this to their flocks, very many Catholics are completely unaware of this obligation.

The Church's new disciplines on fast and abstinence were decreed by Pope Paul VI in his 1966 Apostolic Constitution "Paenitemini" ("Be Converted") and were then (licitly) amended by the U.S. bishops, who allowed us, on Fridays outside of Lent, to substitute other penitential acts for abstinence from meat. I recommend that everyone read the pope's short document.

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), March 16, 2003.

I would jusy like to say that I believe in eating meat as long as the animals have a good life before they are killed and are not cooped up all their life

-- lucy benton (lucy_is_hot@msn.com), March 16, 2003.

Dear Lucy,

Are you saying that we can eat animals that are hunted down in the wild, but not animals that are raised on farms? I am aware of the crowded conditions under which some food animals, especially poultry, are raised. Is that what you are referring to? Or are cows in a fenced pasture also "cooped up"? You are dealing here with two separate issues. First, whether we are allowed to use animals as food, which we are. And secondly, whether animals can be raised under crowded, inhumane conditions, in order to incease the amount of meat that can be raised per square yard of space. That is open to debate.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), March 16, 2003.

Fasting is abstaining from food in general. I see absolutely no point in trying to abstain from meat and yet eat other things and call fasting. As far as I'm concerned, it's still feasting, not fasting !

Secondly, to think that our abstaining from meat can atone for our sins I think is to substitute Christ's redemptive work on the cross.

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), March 16, 2003.

Dear Oliver,

Abstaining from meat on certain appointed days is not known as fasting. It is known as abstinence. Fasting is, just as you said, general abstaining from food. There are certain days when Catholics are required to fast, that is, to have only one full meal during a 24- hour period, with no eating between meals. On some days, such as Ash Wednesday, both fasting and abstinence are required, but they are distinct disciplines.

The Bible teaches repeatedly about the need to curb our passions, grow in self-control, and die to ourselves. Christ Himself said there are certain kinds of evil spirits which cannot be expelled except by prayer and fasting. Prayer and fasting then have great spiritual benefit. How then can you suggest that such disciplines as abstinence and fasting take anything away from the redemptive work of Christ? In Luke 2:37, the practice of fasting is again revealed as a means to deep spiritual growth. The Apostles often fasted before making important decisions (Acts 13:2, Acts 14;23). The Church today guides us in following the same spiritual path as the apostles and the early Church. Fasting is an important part of that spirituality.

-- Paul (PaulCyp@cox.net), March 16, 2003.

Oliver writes:

"Secondly, to think that our abstaining from meat can atone for our sins I think is to substitute Christ's redemptive work on the cross."

Oliver, you are assuming that you know why we fast.

To understand fasting, we should start from the basics without non-Catholic assumptions. Fasting is a Biblical practice. Reading from the Gospel of Matthew, Chapter 6 (Our Lord is speaking):

Matthew 6:16-18 - "'When you fast, do not look gloomy like the hypocrites. They neglect their appearance, so that they may appear to others to be fasting. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you fast, anoint your head and wash your face, so that you may not appear to be fasting, except to your Father who is hidden. And your Father who sees what is hidden will repay you.'"

According to Our Lord, God will "repay" us in Heaven. I think that many Protestants (whether individuals or denominations) understand this Biblical practice.

In my view (I believe it is shared by most Catholics), the act of fasting is a way to deny ourselves (mortification) so that we can unite ourselves to Jesus Christ. I really don't fast thinking of God's repayment in Heaven. I fast so that I can submit myself more completely to the will of Our Lord.

When we over-indulge our body, we become self-centered instead of Christ-centered. Fasting is the antidote to (and the opposite of) indulging.

In Christ,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), March 16, 2003.

PS--Though the theological reasoning behind fasting and abstinence may differ slightly, the main idea behind both is the same--self-denial and uniting ourselves to the Lord.

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), March 16, 2003.

Mateo, I have no prob with fasting, and I share your sentiments about fasting as you illustrated with the verse. However, my point was that it cannot be used to atone for sins. This is in response to Ed, whom I quote :

"Catholics abstain from eating meat as part of their spiritual life for three reasons:
1.) To practise repentance - the act of showing remorse or contrition for past sins and offering atonement to God for same. "

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), March 17, 2003.

Jmj
Hi, Oliver.

After all this time that you have spent with Catholics (and could/should have spent reading our Catechism), are you really not aware that the Catholic Church teaches that the redemptive sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross -- his "atonement" for our sins -- was sufficient, even super-abundant, and does not need to be supplemented or replaced by atonement done by us?

Please reassure me that you have not been visiting the forum, for a few months, in order to "hover" and then "swoop in for the kill" whenever you come across a Catholic phrase or comment that you consider anti-biblical.

When Ed used the phrase, "offering atonement to God," he was not implying that the work of Jesus was insufficient or incomplete. Rather he was referring to simple human acts of reparation/sacrifice that we offer in order to place ourselves in union with the atoning sacrifice of Jesus.

Always remember that, as St. Paul said, we, the Catholic Church, are the mystical "Body of Christ." He is the Head, and we are the members. So, in a subordinate way, our acts of atonement/reparation are acts of the Body of Christ. This ties in to what St. Paul told the Colossians:
"Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ's afflictions for the sake of His Body, that is, the Church ...".

God bless you.
John

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), March 17, 2003.

Well said John!

-- Ed Lauzon (grader@accglobal.net), March 17, 2003.

John,

Ditto what Ed said. :-)

God bless you,

Mateo

-- (MattElFeo@netscape.net), March 17, 2003.

Hey Ben Thinkin' , Where do you get a bologna sandwich on a desert island?.

A. You make it from the sand which is there.

From a big ham!

-- Myron (Sam'sdeli@aol.com), March 17, 2003.

Thanks very much, Ed L and Mateo.
Always nice to talk with you.
JFG

-- J. F. Gecik (jfgecik@hotmail.com), March 17, 2003.

Thanks for your reply John. To be honest, I'm not here just to swoop at attack on remarks. Sorry if it seems that way sometimes. Many a time I have supported the comments of the people in this forum. It is not my goal to cause chaos in here, that is not Christ-like.

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), March 17, 2003.

Fasting seems to backfire on me. I fast on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday. They are my two worst days of the year. It doesn't help me spritually. All I can do is think about food and how hungry I am and that the next day I can have something substantial to eat. It really takes my mind off of God. I don't feel like praying because I'm so hungry. Does this happen to anyone else? What do you do?

-- Sharon (delipasta@hotmail.com), March 17, 2003.

My friend, you write you don't feel like praying because you are hungry. I sometimes don't feel like praying for all sorts of reasons, because Satan always tries to usurp our time and our preoccupations away from God.

Satan caused the body to become sinful flesh, and the soul to become corrupt. But praise the Lord, one place where he cannot reach us is in our regenerated human spirit !

When I feel like I don't want to pray, I realise I need to pray more ! It's a blessing to discover that Satan's schemes are always the feel-good-now-pay-later type. Whilest submitting to the self I might feel the benefits now but I feel guilty later. By praying in our spirit, the Lord can energize our whole being to overcome things of the enemy. Sometimes we just need to pray "Lord, make me a praying person, I am weak but you are strong."

-- Oliver Fischer (spicenut@excite.com), March 17, 2003.

So many wonderful answers to Ben Thinking's question. If I could put in my two cents.........it seems to me that the bottom line when it comes to Church disciplines like abstaining from meat and fasting is obedience. That, of course, is why the yummy lobster was the right choice in the desert island scenario.

Some people don't think it's fair that in pre-Vatican II days it was a serious sin to eat meat on any Friday, and now it's not. It seems to me that the meat itself wasn't the issue, but rather the spirit of obedience which manifested itself in a person's willingness to recognize the authority which Jesus gave to His Church. It's not keeping a Big Mac out of our mouths that counts, but the disposition of our spirit which chooses to obey or rebel.

Also, I think most Catholics realize that days of abstinance aren't occasions for gourmet seafood dinners. Most of the people I know eat stuff like tuna salad, or the five dollar plate dinners served up by parish groups after Friday evening Way of the Cross.

One helpful thing I've noticed about the fasting and abstinence is that it does help to remind me of Jesus. When I think about what to grab for lunch, I recall that I can't have meat, which means I recall why that is, and so I think of Jesus; and the same thing happens at dinner, or while I'm grocery shopping that day. If not being able to eat meat can bring Jesus to mind just a few times in a day, then I'd say it's a sacrifice well worth it!

May He be forever praised!

Therese

-- Therese Anderson (MTherese2@aol.co), March 18, 2003.

Why not meat, but lobster?

The reason is very simple, and it is that Friday abstinence was also a way for the Church to ask the *rich* to show solidarity with the poor, as until fairly recently in many countries, especially dry mediterranean countries like Italy, only the rich and very rich could afford meat every day.

The vast majority of the population could only afford meat twice a year, on Christmas and Easter; and even then usually only poultry or sausage, never mind steak or venison.

There used to be the tradition that meat be eaten on a thick slice of bread, and the rich would give as charity those slices of bread, well soaked with meat juices and with bits of meat stuck in them, to the poor, who would queue outside the houses of the rich at the end of dinner.

Conversely fish was considered food for the poor, as it could just be just taken out of the sea/rivers/lakes, not expensively raised on the best (wettest) grazing fields.

The ability to eat meat regularly was a distinctive characteristic of the rich and powerful, a bit like carrying a sword. In particular by the way venison, which was reserved for the rich and powerful under pain of death (there used to be the death sentence for poachers). This was in part due to some superstition about eating venison giving a more aggressive personality. Eating meat in general actually seems to make people more assertive, so the rich and powerful preferred the rest of the populace to eat grain based food that seems to make people less aggressive.

Thus by asking the rich (because the poor "abstained" from meat all year) to eat fish or vegetables on Fridays the Church was asking them to lower themselves to eat the humble fare of the poor, as a show of personal status sacrifice and solidarity with the less fortunate.

It was a kind of sumptuary rule.

-- P. Grandi (pg_spun@sabi.Clara.co.UK), July 21, 2003.