Radio Replies First Volume - Fasting

Celledoor.com ^ | 1938 | Fathers Rumble & Carty

[GonzoII]

Fasting

1184. You claim to legislate in purely spiritual things, yet order fast and abstinence on certain days. There is nothing spiritual in forbidding people to eat meat.

I have never said that the Church legislates only in spiritual matters. Men are not purely spiritual beings, and in our composite nature, spiritual legislation must in some way affect our material being. The laws of the Church cover material things in so far as they affect our spiritual welfare. There is nothing spiritual about meat in itself. But spiritual virtue is exercised when we abstain from meat from a motive of self-denial, gratitude, and obedience to God.

1185. Is there any Scripture warrant for fasting?

Yes. When the Pharisees complained to Christ that His disciples did not fast, He replied that they did not while He was with them, but that they would when He had gone from them. Mk 2:18. Now the Catholic Church, ordered by Christ to teach all nations whatsoever Christ had said to her, tells us that at certain times we must fast in expiation of our sins. St. Paul wrote to the Corinthians, "Let us exhibit ourselves as servants of God, in patience, in fastings." A Christian spirit of reparation says, "I indulged my senses at the expense of God's law; I will therefore now mortify them at the expense of my own comfort." However it is part of Christian law, and those who say that the Catholic Church obliges fasting while other Churches do not, complain as usual that the Catholic Church is fulfilling the Christian law while others are not. And the Catholic Church appoints special days, for if it were left to individuals they would fast very irregularly, or not at all. It is much better to make it definite.

1186. Why forbid meat on Fridays? Christ said that nothing from without defiles a man, but that it is disposition of soul that counts. Mk 7:15.

It follows that meat is not evil in itself, and that the Church does not forbid meat on Fridays because she thinks that meat will defile men. That should be evident from the fact that the Church permits meat on other days, as she could not do if she believed meat to be evil. Therefore it must be a question of the day, and not of the meat. Why then does the Church forbid meat on Fridays? Because on that day Christ gave His life for us in misery and suffering. If a Catholic eats meat on that day, the meat does not defile him, but his interior disposition of ingratitude and disobedience certainly does. If a man is not prepared to give up a little meat on the day Christ gave up His life, he is not worthy to be ranked as a Christian. The Friday abstinence has kept Our Lord's sacrifice and death before the minds of millions of Catholics for centuries. To the vast majority of the Protestant Churches which abolished this beautiful practice merely because the Catholic Church had the grace to fulfill it, Friday is just like Tuesday, or Wednesday, or Thursday, and their members do not think week by week of the greatest event that ever occurred in history for love of us. I have never yet received a convert into the Church who has not seen the beauty of this devotedness to Christ, and of the loyalty with which the Church recalls Friday as the day of the greatest event in our redemption. That non-Catholics should be silent about this Catholic custom I could understand. But that they should still profess to be Christians and then blame the Catholic Church for such a generous and loving act in honor of Christ merely because they do not do it themselves is astonishing.

1187. The Bible says that Anti-Christ will bid men abstain from meats. 1 Tim 4:3.

The reference is to men who teach that meat is evil in itself and who declare that it is wicked to eat it under any circumstances. But Catholics do not believe or teach this. Almost any butcher will tell you that he supplies many Catholic customers regularly with meat.

1188. When did the practice of Friday abstinence from meat begin?

In the very earliest ages of the Church. The practice is mentioned in the Didache or Doctrine of the Twelve Apostles, a booklet written by one of the immediate followers of the Apostles in the year 90.

1189. Who said that every man will go to hell if he eats meat on Friday?

No one. The Catholic Church says that it is a mortal sin for a Catholic to eat meat on Friday knowingly and wilfully, without a sufficiently grave and excusing reason. Then that Church says that if a man dies in unrepented mortal sin, he will go to hell.

1190. I don't blame Catholics for voluntarily abstaining from meat on Fridays, but to do so because ordered to do so is making a virtue of necessity.

That is not true. No Catholic is physically compelled to abstain from meat on Fridays. It is a moral obligation, adding the virtue of obedience to that of Christian mortification. On your method of reasoning you should say that a man should voluntarily abstain from stealing, and that it is wrong to do so because God has said, "Thou shalt not steal." And do the laws of the land destroy the virtue of citizens because there is a moral obligation to observe them?

1191. Ought not Catholics to abstain from intoxicating drink on Fridays?

There is no law obliging them to do so. Of course there is always the law of conscience forbidding drinking to excess on any day. Yet, although there is no law forbidding drink in moderation on Fridays, it would be a very good and meritorious action if a man did abstain voluntarily from alcoholic drink on that day in a spirit of mortification and self-denial. But that would not dispense him from the obligation to abstain from meat. Let a man fulfill the law, and then do more if he wishes. Obedience is better than sacrifices prompted by one's own opinions.

1192. Would it not be better for the Church to forbid intoxicants rather than harmless meat?

It would not. The Church wishes to forbid a thing wich most of her people will miss. Practically all eat meat; not all by any means drink intoxicants. All are united in a common act of mortification. There is a tendency in men to think that all laws should conform to their own pet ideas. A man likes his meat and dislikes drink. So he suggests that the Church should rather forbid drink than meat. But drink does not affect all men; meat affects practically all.

Encoding copyright 2009 by Frederick Manligas Nacino. Some rights reserved.
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0
http://www.celledoor.com/cpdv-ebe/

[annalex]

I asked what is deceptive about the Radio Replies. Don’t allege what you are not about to prove.

I also offered a list of outright fraud in Protestant Bible translations. On the current topic I showed you what the Bible really says about fasting.

And the wealth in the Vatican is something people donated to it freely. Hope it grows.

[T Minus Four]

Let’s just walk away now, shall we? Carry on.

[annalex]

So you retract the accusation that Radio Replies are deceptive?

[T Minus Four]

Of course not, they are lies.

But go ahead and have the last word. I’m sure that makes you right.

[T Minus Four]

Proverbs 26:4 Don’t answer a fool according to his folly, Lest you also be like him.

Proverbs 26:5 Answer a fool according to his folly, Lest he be wise in his own eyes.

On the surface, taken literally, these appear as contradictory commands. But what we must understand is that for many if not most of the proverbs there are two principles which describe the sense in which they are written which resolves such paradoxes.

Principle #1: Many of the apparent commands are to be taken not as explicit commands but rather as principles - IF A THEN B.

Principle #2: Most of the proverbs are GENERAL principles as opposed to things which are true in every particular case. Thus most should be understood to be preceeded with the expression "Generally speaking".

So for example in the cases above we would say "Generally speaking if you answer a fool according to his folly then you will be like him, but on the other hand you will prevent him from being wise in his own eyes."

Thus you are presented with a choice in answering a fool. Proverbs considers the pros and cons but leaves it up to you to decide which is best for your particular circumstances.

I am going to choose Proverbs 26:4 from this point on, so this is the last you will hear from me, no matter how much bait you throw out

[annalex]

Honorable people don’t make accusations they are not ready to substantiate.