Posted on 11/18/2012 3:18:25 PM PST by NYer
Want to feel old? Talk to anyone under the age of 50 about meatless Fridays. Odds are, they will have no memory of it. They will have no knowledge of why Catholics were called mackerel snappers, nor will they laugh at tired George Carlin routines about going to hell for eating a hot dog.
And they sure as heck wont know why many restaurant chains still have their fish specials on Fridays.
But for all you youngsters, you might get ready: Friday abstinence may be coming back.
Once upon a time, children, Catholics abstained from meat on Fridays as a small act of penance. Not just Fridays during Lent, but all Fridays. Friday was the day of the Lords death on the cross, and throughout the year, not just on Good Friday, Catholics would commemorate that day in a special way. One still finds this practice in religious communities like monasteries, and the British bishops restored the practice last year.
In general, however, meatless Fridays disappeared after the Second Vatican Council, despite the fact that canon law (Canon 1251) still asks us to abstain from meat or other food on Fridays subject to the requirements of the local conference of bishops.
The irony is that of all the many changes when the Church windows were opened to the fresh wind of aggiornamento, this one may have been one of the more significant. It was a small act of penance that was thoroughly integrated into everyones lives.
Of course, not everyone did it with full consciousness of what it was intended to commemorate. For many, it just became a rule, and junior theologians like young George Carlin loved to debate whether eating a hot dog on Friday led one straight down the brimstone path to hell.
Yet when Friday abstinence was done away with, it had a rather oversized impact on Catholic identity. It turned out it was a significant public acknowledgement of ones faith, like ashes on the forehead. The bishops hadnt meant for such small acts of penance to go away. They had intended to open up other options for sacrifice. But, of course, they werent.
And all those junior theologians? They wondered why one day you could go to hell for eating meat on Friday and the next week it was no big deal. Ultimately, this was a case when punishments became more important than catechesis, and what had a historic and pastoral value became instead a rule for a rules sake. Then, over-emphasizing the penalties was compensated for by abandoning the practice all together, and neither response was right.
However, the Church may get a chance to try again. In his speech to his fellow bishops Nov. 13, Cardinal Timothy Dolan, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, suggested that it might be time to return to the practice of Friday abstinence.
The work of our Conference during the coming year, he said, includes reflection on re-embracing Friday as a particular day of penance, including the possible reinstitution of abstinence on all Fridays of the year, not just during Lent.
Now to be fair, he did not specifically mention giving up meat. And, of course, one could give up television screens, or dessert, or a hundred other little pleasures we all enjoy. But I hope we do go back to those meatless Fridays. There is something to be said for Catholics knowing they are all in it together. This time, maybe we will not put the focus on the threats or the punishments, but use this as a teaching moment and a positive reinforcement of our Catholic identity.
My real hope is that we will also keep in mind why we are doing it: To remember Someone who gave up a lot more for us.
There is always spaghetti with marinara.
That was not an option in 1960 grade school cafeterias. Only fishy fish and horrible Tartar sauce.
But H. Salt Fish and Trader Joe's Cod is really good.
Okay, well I’m sticking to pasta and pizza. Fish is nasty.
Don’t like fish? I wonder if homemade macaroni and cheese is a suitable gesture? I’m also a huge fan of eggplant parmesan, and Michelangelo’s vegetable lasagna. Trader Joe’s lentil soup is also good for lunch.
The doctrine of Catholics is quite different, when they condemn the marriages of priests and of such as have made a vow to God to lead always a single life; or when the Church forbids persons to eat flesh in Lent, or on fasting-days, unless their health require it. We hold that marriage in itself is not only honourable, but a sacrament of divine institution. We believe and profess that the same only true God is the author of all creatures which are good of themselves; that all eatables are to be eaten with thanksgiving, and none of them to be rejected, as coming from the author of evil. When we condemn priests for marrying, it is for breaking their vows and promises made to God of living unmarried, and of leading a more perfect life; we condemn them with the Scripture, which teaches us that vows made are to be kept; with St. Paul, who in the next chap. (ver. 12) teaches us, that they who break such vows incur their damnation.
When the Church, which we are commanded to obey, enjoins abstinence from flesh, or puts a restraint as to the times of eating on days of humiliation and fasting, it is by way of self-denial and mortification: so that it is not the meats, but the transgression of the precept, that on such occasions defiles the consciences of the transgressors. "You will object, (says St. Chrysostom) that we hinder persons from marrying; God forbid," &c. St. Augustine, (lib. 30. contra Faustum. chap. vi.) "You see (says he) the great difference in abstaining from meats for mortification sake, and as if God was not the author of them." We may observe that God, in the law of Moses, prohibited swine's flesh and many other eatables; and that even the apostles, in the Council of Jerusalem, forbad the Christians, (at least about Antioch) to eat at that time blood and things strangled; not that they were bad of themselves, as the Manicheans pretended. (Witham) ---
St. Paul here speaks of the Gnostics and other ancient heretics, who absolutely condemned marriage and the use of all kind of meat, because they pretended that all flesh was from an evil principle: whereas the Church of God so far from condemning marriage, holds it to be a holy sacrament, and forbids it to none but such as by vow have chosen the better part: and prohibits not the use of any meats whatsoever, in proper times and seasons, though she does not judge all kinds of diet proper for days of fasting and penance. (Challoner) --- We may see in the earliest ages[centuries] of Christianity, that some of the most infamous and impure heretics that ever went out of the Church, condemned all marriage as unlawful, at the same time allowing the most unheard of abominations: men without religion, without faith, without modesty, without honour. See St. Clement of Alexandria, lib. 3. Strom.
“Other students fornicate on Saturday and go to church on Sunday.”
Saturday night they sow their wild oats and Sunday they are in the pews praying for crop failure.
Agreed!
I had a feeling it had something to do w/ making it more populist. When I was young there was a very large Catholic family across the street from us. I would be invited to go to church w/ the twin girls who were my age. I always loved how silent and serious the atmosphere was and the incense. It was just a very holy place. I remember being in awe. I did love those times. This was back in the late 60’s.
I also remember that when I had dinner w/ them on Fridays they ONLY had fish!
Thank you for the explanation. Were the majority of Catholics happy about the change or unhappy w/ it? To be honest, all of the Catholics I know (including my husband, his father remains the only practicing Catholic in their family) are lapsed Catholics.
“Were the majority of Catholics happy about the change or unhappy”
I’m too young to know for sure...but based on how poorly we catholics adhere to the rule during lent, I’d say alot were already violating it anyway, and were happy to see the change.
I grew up in the 1970’s; and, our catholic church had some long-haired hippy types playing acoustic guitar and tambarines. The new building was very modernistic...and the decision was made to use ‘chairs’ instead of pews (no kneelers!). So the church was definitely in flux at that time (at least in the US).
Today, the church has lost the hippy band, and the building has been quadrupled in size...and its now a catholic version of a southern (Alabama) megachurch. Quite a departure from the traditional catholic model.
Thanks for your reply. Some things should NEVER try & be trendy & a church is one of them.
Yes we know but Christians hear and obey God's Word. God tells us where some rules come from - not St. Chrysostom.
Actually your no Bible expert, perhaps your taught view of the Bible does not encompass all of it. Just saying!
Col 1:24
http://bible.cc/colossians/1-24.htm
A Protestant moved to a Catholic neighborhood and would fire up the BBQ and throw on some steaks every Friday evening.
His neighbors were having trouble enjoying their fish while smelling the scent of sizzling beef. So they got together and came to him and convinced him that the thing to do would be to convert to Catholicism.
He went to a Priest and the Priest pronounced over him “You were born Protestant, you were raised Protestant - but now you are Catholic.” Everyone was happy.
Then next Friday they all smelled sizzling beef from his place again, they gathered around as he was smiling at his BBQ just in time to see him pull a steak off the grill and say...
“You were born a cow, you were raised a cow - but now you are a FISH!”
The history is being presented .
Parts of the Bible you've obviously never had read to you:
"Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up those things that are wanting of the sufferings of Christ, in my flesh, for His body, which is the church:" Colossians 1:24
"Wherefore let them also that suffer according to the will of God, commend their souls in good deeds to the faithful Creator." 1 Peter 4:19
Sorry can't re-write God's Word to fit a man made tradition.
You no doubt are referring to the KJV which showed up over 12 centuries ater the original.
Here's a few more for you to ponder, madame:
"But there are also many other things which Jesus did; which, if they were written every one, the world itself, I think, would not be able to contain the books that should be written." John 21:25
"Therefore, brethren, stand fast; and hold the traditions which you have learned, whether by word, or by our epistle." 2 Thessalonians 2:14
"And we charge you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every brother walking disorderly, and not according to the tradition which they have received of us." 2 Thessalonians 3:6
Look at Crosshairs who calls Catholics pagan and ignorant of the Bible. Throw a Bible verse(in context)Col 1:24 at him which unveils his ignorant taught ‘theology’ and he goes deaf and dumb.
BTW, Crosshairs I’ve read the Bible OT-NT front to back , 3 times over in the last 2 years...and much more. But, in your mind that probably doesnt match up to the anti-Catholic content sermons you get on Sundays and tapes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.