This article is somewhat disingenuous by purposely obscuring the fact that the traditional practice IS to fast for every single one of the 40 days. The article talks about the 2nd century, but then jumps ahead to 1966, in a perfect example of the "antiquarianism" that was condemned by Pope Pius XII. Somehow it fails to mention that for hundreds of years prior to 1966, all faithful were obligated to fasting and partial abstinence EVERY day during Lent (except Sundays which technically are not included in Lent).
Prenant or nursing women and men who performed hard labor were exempted from the obligation except on Fridays and Ash Wednesday. This would have included a large percentage of the Catholic population a hundred years ago. But all those who lived the way that we live today were obligated to fast and abstain.
Fasting means taking only 2 small meals (called a "collation") not amounting to 1 normal meal, and 1 full meal. Meat, meat soup and meat gravy could only be eaten at the full meal. There could be no "eating between meals" (maybe your mother was on to something).
This is the first year that I have been fully aware of the traditional practice. It would seem hypocritical to attend the Latin Mass but opt out of the difficult part of traditional Catholicism. So this year I plan to follow the traditional guidelines. I also ordered a calendar with both traditional and current feast days so I know when "Ember Days" and "Rogation Days" fall.
The Holy Season of Lent -- Fast and Abstinence
|
Lenten Question |
BTTT! Lent, 2006, is fast approaching!