Catholics : Why not meat on Fridays during lent?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jesus died on Friday. To commemorate the death of his body, people traditionally abstained from flesh. Fish are cold-blooded and traditionally not considered flesh. It also dates back to the Jewish kosher law where fish are not considered meat either.

Some bishops have made dispensations for certain animals. Like in New Orleans, the bishop permits alligator to be eaten on Fridays. There’s a diocese in Michigan (I think) where they are dispensed to eat beaver!

So if the flesh of animals is similar enough to the flesh of human for the symbolism, then why is meat eating so widely accepted as normal?

Some amount of meat for the sustenance of life could be justified, but the daily eating of meat as staple to one's diet on most every day except Fridays during Lent seems a little meaningless.

It’s a religion. Lots of things don’t make sense.

Do you feel happy about yourself now?

[Anonymous]

You are using terms in their present sense that had very different meanings in the past. Abstaining from meat on Fridays actually began in the first century of Christianity because, as some response noted, it was a symbolic gesture of sacrificing flesh as Christ did on the cross. When the word "meat" is used in that context, it refers to flesh meat which at that time meant the flesh of warm-blooded mammals. The Latin word for this is "caro" and is the root of such words as carnivorous (meat eating). The word "caro" was NOT used to refer to the meat of cold-blooded animals like fish, amphibians, and reptiles -- they were considered different and, thus, were permissible to eat on Fridays. In other words, what we call meat today is much more inclusive than when the tradition began almost 2000 years ago. It's not surprising, then, that the tradition isn't as sensical to us in the present as it was to the people of much earlier times.

Catholics and some other Christian branches kept the meat-free Fridays throughout the year until the mid 1980s, when the observance was changed to Fridays in Lent (and Ash Wednesday, as well).

Bishops throughout the world were able to (slightly) alter the rules to fit problems unique to their territory. The famed Michigan muskrat permission actually began in the late 1700s in the land around the Detroit River when the coldest months made it difficult to gather enough fish. Pushing the rationale, it was decided that the muskrat was in the water enough to be kind of like amphibians and were allowed. In recent years, when that permission was being reviewed, it was decided that the exemption lasted over 300 years and should not be changed. One of the bishops in Michigan during that review noted that eating muskrat was, truly, a great sacrifice. LOL!

It should be noted, too, that the Church never mandated fish be eaten -- just that flesh meat should not be consumed. That's why it is permissible to eat snake, frogs, etc. which, in our modern parlance, would be considered meat but was not considered such as the tradition evolved.

Words have different meanings in different periods of history so we need to keep that in mind when trying to explain things like this.

(Sorry if I came off as a professor but, as you can see, there truly is a reason the rules are what they are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jesus died on Friday. To commemorate the death of his body, people traditionally abstained from flesh. Fish are cold-blooded and traditionally not considered flesh. It also dates back to the Jewish kosher law where fish are not considered meat either.

Some bishops have made dispensations for certain animals. Like in New Orleans, the bishop permits alligator to be eaten on Fridays. There’s a diocese in Michigan (I think) where they are dispensed to eat beaver!

So if the flesh of animals is similar enough to the flesh of human for the symbolism, then why is meat eating so widely accepted as normal?

Some amount of meat for the sustenance of life could be justified, but the daily eating of meat as staple to one's diet on most every day except Fridays during Lent seems a little meaningless.

It’s a religion. Lots of things don’t make sense.

Do you feel happy about yourself now?

Do you feel the need to make an ad hominem attack? about something that is accurate?

People don't participate in religions because they make sense. They participate because they believe and have faith.

[Anonymous]

Might be off topic but I don’t understand why fish is a luxury? White fish or salmon for example is cheaper than most steak. We eat fish twice a week and don’t eat any red meat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jesus died on Friday. To commemorate the death of his body, people traditionally abstained from flesh. Fish are cold-blooded and traditionally not considered flesh. It also dates back to the Jewish kosher law where fish are not considered meat either.

Some bishops have made dispensations for certain animals. Like in New Orleans, the bishop permits alligator to be eaten on Fridays. There’s a diocese in Michigan (I think) where they are dispensed to eat beaver!

So if the flesh of animals is similar enough to the flesh of human for the symbolism, then why is meat eating so widely accepted as normal?

Some amount of meat for the sustenance of life could be justified, but the daily eating of meat as staple to one's diet on most every day except Fridays during Lent seems a little meaningless.

It’s a religion. Lots of things don’t make sense.

Do you feel happy about yourself now?

Do you feel the need to make an ad hominem attack? about something that is accurate?

People don't participate in religions because they make sense. They participate because they believe and have faith.

Previous poster made an ad hominem attack on religion. You’re just responding to an innocent question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jesus died on Friday. To commemorate the death of his body, people traditionally abstained from flesh. Fish are cold-blooded and traditionally not considered flesh. It also dates back to the Jewish kosher law where fish are not considered meat either.

Some bishops have made dispensations for certain animals. Like in New Orleans, the bishop permits alligator to be eaten on Fridays. There’s a diocese in Michigan (I think) where they are dispensed to eat beaver!

So if the flesh of animals is similar enough to the flesh of human for the symbolism, then why is meat eating so widely accepted as normal?

Some amount of meat for the sustenance of life could be justified, but the daily eating of meat as staple to one's diet on most every day except Fridays during Lent seems a little meaningless.

It’s a religion. Lots of things don’t make sense.

Do you feel happy about yourself now?

Do you feel the need to make an ad hominem attack? about something that is accurate?

People don't participate in religions because they make sense. They participate because they believe and have faith.

Previous poster made an ad hominem attack on religion. You’re just responding to an innocent question.

It was an accurate statement about religion. Nothing ad hominem about it. Religion is based on faith, not facts and logic. Religious people are proud of their faith and hold on to it fiercely, even if they learn that some facts about it may not be accurate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jesus died on Friday. To commemorate the death of his body, people traditionally abstained from flesh. Fish are cold-blooded and traditionally not considered flesh. It also dates back to the Jewish kosher law where fish are not considered meat either.

Some bishops have made dispensations for certain animals. Like in New Orleans, the bishop permits alligator to be eaten on Fridays. There’s a diocese in Michigan (I think) where they are dispensed to eat beaver!

So if the flesh of animals is similar enough to the flesh of human for the symbolism, then why is meat eating so widely accepted as normal?

Some amount of meat for the sustenance of life could be justified, but the daily eating of meat as staple to one's diet on most every day except Fridays during Lent seems a little meaningless.

It’s a religion. Lots of things don’t make sense.

Bingo

This. Why do Jews clean for Pessach? It’s like they’re going to accidentally eat a leavened couch crumb. It’s just tradition, it makes no sense, but people do it because it’s important to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Might be off topic but I don’t understand why fish is a luxury? White fish or salmon for example is cheaper than most steak. We eat fish twice a week and don’t eat any red meat.

Sigh. For most, steak is a luxury— unless you’re talking Murray’s. Perhaps a better comparison — if you’re going to focus on price — would be ground beef or some cuts of pork. Unless, by “salmon” you meant canned.

[Anonymous]

You fast to focus on prayer and repentance and get ready for Easter. Eating less in general is part of the Lenten fast, if you look up the actual rules, as well as no meat on Fridays. Eastern Rite Catholics and Orthodox don't eat meat at all during Lent.

[Anonymous]

You don't have to eat fish! You can eat rice and beans. In fact, I have heard some parishes describe fasting as one main meal and two small, simple meals.

[Anonymous]

So glad I gave up meat 31 years ago. Sheesh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jesus died on Friday. To commemorate the death of his body, people traditionally abstained from flesh. Fish are cold-blooded and traditionally not considered flesh. It also dates back to the Jewish kosher law where fish are not considered meat either.

Some bishops have made dispensations for certain animals. Like in New Orleans, the bishop permits alligator to be eaten on Fridays. There’s a diocese in Michigan (I think) where they are dispensed to eat beaver!

Thanks -- this makes sense if the goal is to abstain from flesh. But as you noted, people are allowed to eat various flesh like beaver, frog legs, muskrat (which is a rodent).. and eggs too (I guess that's pre-flesh?). https://www.newsobserver.com/news/nation-world/national/article259005888.html

I just remember going out two Fridays ago with friends and since I couldnt' eat meat, I had escargot and a great seafood stew. That hardly seems ascetic compared to the pollo al limone I'd otherwise order.

The ascetic element of Lent extends beyond just the Friday abstinence though. That’s what the penance and amendment of life (of your own choosing) you are supposed to undertake for Lent.

If you think eating a $40 plate of escargot is not enough of a sacrifice, you’re free to make a more modest choice in dinner. The church isn’t mandating that you deny yourself extraordinarily beyond what she upholds as her rule. A spiritual director or speaking to your parish priest might be of help in this.

OP here. I did give up something for all of lent, and it's definitely been a sacrifice.

I guess the meat thing is my issue. To me, fish is a luxury and meat is a staple, so why are we being instructed to abstain from meat but not fish? It seems like it should be the other way around, at least in this country.

Local bishops made exceptions to allow people to eat beaver and alligator, not because they are luxuries but because they are staple foods in those areas. Shouldn't the US bishops advise follows to abstain from fish instead of meat?

I would gladly abstain from eating alligator and beaver any day of the week.