Abstanence and fasting rules needed

[TBolt1000T]

Could someone please post the rules on abstanence and fasting during Lent? I’m being told different things by different people, and now, I don’t know what I can eat on Fridays during Lent. Should I worry about what kind of oil something like potato chips were cooked in, etc, because if I should, there’s no way for me to find out on my own, because I’m totally blind, and I can’t see the ingrediants list. I also don’t know if I did the Ash Wednesday fasting and abstanence right. Please help!

 

[Pacbox]

Here are the rules:

From Canon Law:
c. 1252: All persons who have completed their fourteenth year are bound by the law of abstinence; all adults are bound by the law of fast up to the beginning of their sixtieth year. Nevertheless, pastors and parents are to see to it that minors who are not bound by the law of fast and abstinence are educated in an authentic sense of penance.

c. 1253: It is for the conference of bishops to determine more precisely the observance of fast and abstinence and to substitute in whole or in part for fast and abstinence other forms of penance, especially works of charity and exercises of piety.

From the US Conference of Catholic Bishops (by way of EWTN’s website)

Abstinence The law of abstinence requires a Catholic 14 years of age until death to abstain from eating meat on Fridays in honor of the Passion of Jesus on Good Friday. Meat is considered to be the flesh and organs of mammals and fowl. Moral theologians have traditionally considered this also to forbid soups or gravies made from them. Salt and freshwater species of fish, amphibians, reptiles and shellfish are permitted, as are animal derived products such as margarine and gelatin which do not have any meat taste.

During Lent abstinence from meat on Fridays is obligatory in the United States as elsewhere, and it is sinful not to observe this discipline without a serious reason (physical labor, pregnancy, sickness etc.).

Fasting The law of fasting requires a Catholic from the 18th Birthday [Canon 97] to the 59th Birthday * to reduce the amount of food eaten from normal. The Church defines this as one meal a day, and two smaller meals which if added together would not exceed the main meal in quantity. Such fasting is obligatory on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday. The fast is broken by eating between meals and by drinks which could be considered food (milk shakes, but not milk). Alcoholic beverages do not break the fast; however, they seem contrary to the spirit of doing penance.

Those who are excused from fast or abstinence Besides those outside the age limits, those of unsound mind, the sick, the frail, pregnant or nursing women according to need for meat or nourishment, manual laborers according to need, guests at a meal who cannot excuse themselves without giving great offense or causing enmity and other situations of moral or physical impossibility to observe the penitential discipline.

Hope this helps.*

 

[TBolt1000T]

Thanks, Pacbox, for posting the rules. However, this still does not answer my question about oil, potato chips, etc. I don’t want to eat certain potato chips if they’re prohibited because of the oil they’re cooked in. If Canon Law says that I have to be this scrupulous, then it looks like I’m right back to where I was last time when I flunked out of RCIA…

 

[tee_eff_em]

Thanks, Pacbox, for posting the rules. However, this still does not answer my question about oil, potato chips, etc. I don’t want to eat certain potato chips if they’re prohibited because of the oil they’re cooked in. If Canon Law says that I have to be this scrupulous, then it looks like I’m right back to where I was last time when I flunked out of RCIA…

Canon Law does not say you need be so scrupulous. Nor, am I aware, of any other document so binding.
You may relax.

Meat is considered to be the flesh and organs of mammals and fowl. Moral theologians have traditionally considered this also to forbid soups or gravies made from them.

The 1917 Code of Canon Law specifically mentioned soups, but CA apologist Jimmy Akin makes a good case that such are no longer prohibited: [/-]](And Soups Made From Meat – Jimmy Akin).

tee

 

[TBolt1000T]

Canon Law does not say you need be so scrupulous. Nor, am I aware, of any other document so binding.
You may relax.

The 1917 Code of Canon Law specifically mentioned soups, but CA apologist Jimmy Akin makes a good case that such are no longer prohibited: [/-]](And Soups Made From Meat – Jimmy Akin).

tee

Thank you!

It looks as if even by the standards of the 1917 Code of Canon Law, those potato chips would have been ok. I’m already scrupulous as it is, so I’m thankful that I don’t have yet another worry on Fridays during Lent. I’ve done Friday abstanence outside of Lent before, but I wasn’t sure if I had done it correctly until now. Thanks again!

 

[Pacbox]

Canon Law does not say you need be so scrupulous. Nor, am I aware, of any other document so binding.
You may relax.

The 1917 Code of Canon Law specifically mentioned soups, but CA apologist Jimmy Akin makes a good case that such are no longer prohibited: [/-]](And Soups Made From Meat – Jimmy Akin).

tee

I just copied from EWTN since that was the easiest source for what the OP wanted. Just for clarification.

There was a story posted by one of the Eastern Catholics some time back that I’m reminded of. A priest is eating a cracker and a young man from his parish walks up to him and tells him he’s eating beef fat and milk (Eastern Catholic/Eastern Orthodox praxis including abstaining from milk). The priest responds, “No, I’m eating a cracker.”

I think we tend to get too caught up in what and what isn’t allowed, especially when personal applications may go beyond what is required. When one person hears that another isn’t eating A, B, and C because they think it violates the fast, they think they need to go as far or even farther, feeling however falsely, that they need to go further otherwise they aren’t a good Catholic. What works for one person doesn’t necessarily work for another and we shouldn’t apply arbitrary rules (beyond what the Church requires) to people who aren’t capable of meeting them and we shouldn’t make them feel guilty if they can’t match another person’s penance or practice. (Not to pick on you, just pointing out what I’ve seen and read on these fora.)

 

[baltobetsy]

Do you have some kind of potato chip fried in bacon fat or something? That sounds delicious! Please share what brand you’re eating there!

 

[tee_eff_em]

I just copied from EWTN since that was the easiest source for what the OP wanted. Just for clarification.

There was a story posted by one of the Eastern Catholics some time back that I’m reminded of. A priest is eating a cracker and a young man from his parish walks up to him and tells him he’s eating beef fat and milk (Eastern Catholic/Eastern Orthodox praxis including abstaining from milk). The priest responds, “No, I’m eating a cracker.”

I think we tend to get too caught up in what and what isn’t allowed, especially when personal applications may go beyond what is required. When one person hears that another isn’t eating A, B, and C because they think it violates the fast, they think they need to go as far or even farther, feeling however falsely, that they need to go further otherwise they aren’t a good Catholic. What works for one person doesn’t necessarily work for another and we shouldn’t apply arbitrary rules (beyond what the Church requires) to people who aren’t capable of meeting them and we shouldn’t make them feel guilty if they can’t match another person’s penance or practice. (Not to pick on you, just pointing out what I’ve seen and read on these fora.)

No problem – I did not feel at all picked upon.

And I agree that real harm can be done by multiplying the burdens upon others beyond what the Church requires. I always try to be careful to not do so, and have been especially conscious of it in posts in recent days on this and related topics.

(in brief: I wasn’t picking on you either just trying to point to current legislation)

tee

 

[Pacbox]

No problem – I did not feel at all picked upon.

And I agree that real harm can be done by multiplying the burdens upon others beyond what the Church requires. I always try to be careful to not do so, and have been especially conscious of it in posts in recent days on this and related topics.

(in brief: I wasn’t picking on you either just trying to point to current legislation)

tee

I figured you weren’t picking on me. You just caught something I should have, that’s all.

As someone who tends to scrupulosity, especially when it comes to food and fasting, I have to remind myself that I don’t need to be excessive and that the Church doesn’t require excessive. Having done so in the past, and especially with other issues at the moment, I’m taking it “easy” (doing only what the Church requires) when it comes to fasting and abstinence this year (plus the fact that I work long graveyard shifts kind of mitigates if not eliminates part of the fasting/abstinence for me )

 

[baltobetsy]

I’m still waiting to hear what kind of delicious chip would break Friday abstinence. Please tell me what it is so I can eat it on Saturday!