Dispensation from Friday penance day after Thanksgiving?

[mrsdizzyd]

I had no idea of any Friday penitential obligation. I don’t remember it being mentioned in RCIA when I attended a few years ago, and RCIA teaching was very thorough. Is the idea of a current Friday penitential obligation a traditional teaching that is no longer observed by the majority of U.S. Catholics?

It was mentioned in RCIA when I came through and the Catholic School I went to observed no meat Fridays and we were taught why in religion class.

From the sounds of things my experience is not the norm? But, yes, Friday penance is still very much a thing. If I can’t abstain from meat I usually add additional prayers or fast from radio/tv/mindless-internet-scrolling.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

One reason why “No Meat Friday” never came up at my Catholic schools was because in those days the elementary school did not have any cafeteria or food service at all (we walked home for lunch and walked back after lunch) and the high school had a food service but the food and service were so bad that most students brought, rather than bought, lunch. It may be different now that the schools put so much more emphasis on feeding the kids and the kids aren’t going home for lunch.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

The Bishops in the UK have reinstated the rule of abstaining from meat on Fridays as they felt that very few people were performing an alternative penance. In my experience at least, it appears to have fallen on deaf ears as very few people actually observe the Friday abstinence . To be honest I can’t get my head around it. How can something be sinful in one part of the world and not sinful in another part of the world. Surely God’s law and his Church is universal.

The sinfulness is not in failing to abstain from meat in itself, but in disobeying what one’s bishop (or conference of bishops) has decided is in the best interests of souls under his care. The Church has given her bishops authority to bind and loose in these and other matters. So it can vary from diocese to diocese, or from country to country.

To be honest, whenever I am in the UK I have a hard time finding a place to eat where meat is actually being sold (Unless it is a very pricey restaurant maybe, which I usually don’t want to eat in or pay for). Perhaps I just happen to end up in places frequented by huge numbers of vegetarians and vegans, but I actually do have some difficulty, and I notice these things because I have to watch my iron level and take supplements if I’m going to be going days with no meat.

I haven’t been to the UK in almost 30 years, but I didn’t encounter this problem when I was there. Wouldn’t I love a fry-up right about now! (But no black pudding — I was tricked into eating it one time and that stuff is vile.)

I am just pointing out the fact that if there is no dispensation in place, the ordinary Friday obligation remains, and in the United States, we have a choice of either abstinence from flesh meat, or an alternative practice of our choosing.

But there is. Are we dispensed from any kind of penance on the Friday after Thanksgiving, or are we not? Abstinence from meat is the preferred penance, but we may substitute an alternate penance.

It doesn’t really matter to me, because doing penance is never a bad thing, even if it’s not obligatory. I was just trying to raise consciousness that Friday remains a day of penance, and wondering if a pre-Vatican II dispensation still applied. I have a fair idea that this is something not even very many bishops have given thought to, let alone anyone else.

I am going to enjoy my leftovers and find something else to do, the particulars of which will remain in pectore where they belong. I find few things in the Church uglier than someone going around crowing “oh, I’m doing penance today”. Nobody should even know or be able to tell.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

I had no idea of any Friday penitential obligation. I don’t remember it being mentioned in RCIA when I attended a few years ago, and RCIA teaching was very thorough. Is the idea of a current Friday penitential obligation a traditional teaching that is no longer observed by the majority of U.S. Catholics?

I think it’s fair to say that. A friend of mine, recent convert who had been through the whole RCIA program, had no clue when I told her.

One reason why “No Meat Friday” never came up at my Catholic schools was because in those days the elementary school did not have any cafeteria or food service at all (we walked home for lunch and walked back after lunch) and the high school had a food service but the food and service were so bad that most students brought, rather than bought, lunch. It may be different now that the schools put so much more emphasis on feeding the kids and the kids aren’t going home for lunch.

But children of elementary school age aren’t bound by the laws of fast and abstinence. As a practical matter, my son’s former school had meatless Lenten Fridays. It is not a bad habit for children to get into.

 

[dochawk]

I am considering giving up meat(really difficult socially), coffee(difficult after eating and watching kids) chocolate and deserts(likely to offend one of my sisters or wife).

There is a wonderful tale from the early church, in which an older and a young monk were invited to a feast and attended.

The younger monk pointedly drank only water and ate only vegetables, while the older one ate and drank wha was served.

Retiring, the younger ratted out the older to the abbot.

The response was, “You know the fasting rules well, but you understand nothing of charity.”

When you are a guest, eat what is served without a fuss.

 

[Ean_Fanaiochta]

Thank you! I guess it’s true, you can learn something new every day.

 

[PetraG]

He’s a very perceptive man imo. Maybe God is leading him to the Church.

I do hope so. He has been very supportive of our practice of the faith. (He has a relative, also non-Catholic, who attended so faithfully with his Catholic wife and children that someone asked him if he would consider serving on their parish council. He went every Sunday and always showed up when there were work parties and so on. They had never noticed that he never received Holy Communion!)

 

[PetraG]

There is a wonderful tale from the early church, in which an older and a young monk were invited to a feast and attended.

The younger monk pointedly drank only water and ate only vegetables, while the older one ate and drank wha was served.

Retiring, the younger ratted out the older to the abbot.

The response was, “You know the fasting rules well, but you understand nothing of charity.”

When you are a guest, eat what is served without a fuss.

Yes, I think it is better to avoid mortifying or disappointing your hosts and to just do an alternative penance on account of failing to do what was prescribed, if you have to do that.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

There is a wonderful tale from the early church, in which an older and a young monk were invited to a feast and attended.

The younger monk pointedly drank only water and ate only vegetables, while the older one ate and drank wha was served.

Retiring, the younger ratted out the older to the abbot.

The response was, “You know the fasting rules well, but you understand nothing of charity.”

When you are a guest, eat what is served without a fuss.

If I had a guest whose religion forbade him to eat certain foods I was serving, I would be entirely understanding, I would accommodate him, and I would be apologetic about putting him “on the spot” like that. I had a Jewish dinner guest one time and I scrupulously (in the colloquial sense) tried to make the meal compatible with kosher requirements. (I did not kosher my utensils, she wasn’t that Orthodox.)

But not all people think like that. In fact, as I mentioned above, people in my neck of the woods just don’t “get” the concept of religious dietary restrictions. Even traditional Catholic moral theology (Jone notes this) recognizes that sometimes we just have to “eat what is put in front of us”.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

(Sorry for the markings, I got this book second- or third-hand. It’s out of print.)

 

[PhilJ]

I find few things in the Church uglier than someone going around crowing “oh, I’m doing penance today”.

I tell you solemnly they have had their reward.

 

[dochawk]

If I had a guest whose religion forbade him to eat certain foods I was serving, I would be entirely understanding,

If you are the host, charity calls for accommodating the guests in that way.

If you are the guest, Christian charity calls for eating what is served, rather than imposing upon the host’s charity . . .

And another relevant anecdote . . . at a State dinner (is there any other kind with the Queen of England involved?), someone knocked over a wine glass. The queen, reacting quickly, knocked over her own, in turn obligating the rest of the guests to do the same . . . successfully drawing attention away from the original incident.

And less reliant, but amusing . . . a Texan was invited to dinner with the queen. As it turned out she had what is politely referred to as “a touch of the vapors” . . . the first time, the Duke of Wellington coughed and excused himself. The texan was a bit confused at this . The next time, the Duke of Gloucester excused himself. The third time, with a flash of inspiration, he leaped up, slapped the table, and declared, “This one’s on me, Ma’am!”

 

[HomeschoolDad]

And less reliant, but amusing . . . a Texan was invited to dinner with the queen. As it turned out she had what is politely referred to as “a touch of the vapors” . . . the first time, the Duke of Wellington coughed and excused himself. The texan was a bit confused at this . The next time, the Duke of Gloucester excused himself. The third time, with a flash of inspiration, he leaped up, slapped the table, and declared, “This one’s on me, Ma’am!”

I’m sorry… I don’t get it. Perhaps the L-tryptophan from the turkey and dressing is still affecting me. I did not serve potatoes, as I was trying to keep the menu simple and less carb-intensive, so it was not as bad as it could have been, but I still felt pretty logy.

 

[dochawk]

the queen had flatulance, the two lords covered for her, confusing the texan, who figured it out and, err, spilled the beans in trying to cover for the third round . . .

 

[babochka]

The Bishops in the UK have reinstated the rule of abstaining from meat on Fridays as they felt that very few people were performing an alternative penance. In my experience at least, it appears to have fallen on deaf ears as very few people actually observe the Friday abstinence . To be honest I can’t get my head around it. How can something be sinful in one part of the world and not sinful in another part of the world. Surely God’s law and his Church is universal.

I seem to remember that the bishops in the UK made it clear, when reinstating Friday abstinence, that to not abstain was not a sin.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

the queen had flatulance, the two lords covered for her, confusing the texan, who figured it out and, err, spilled the beans in trying to cover for the third round . . .

Oh, okay, those vapors…

I thought “a touch of the vapors” meant that she fell faint, as women were wont to do in the 18th and 19th centuries. That’s why it didn’t make sense to me. Thanks.

 

[babochka]

I thought “a touch of the vapors” meant that she fell faint, as women were wont to do in the 18th and 19th centuries. That’s why it didn’t make sense to me. Thanks.

Yes, those corsets had a way of depriving one of necessary oxygen.

 

[PhilJ]

I seem to remember that the bishops in the UK made it clear, when reinstating Friday abstinence, that to not abstain was not a sin.

I didn’t realise that, thank you.

 

[paperwight]

dochawk:

the queen had flatulance, the two lords covered for her, confusing the texan, who figured it out and, err, spilled the beans in trying to cover for the third round . . .

Oh, okay, those vapors…

I thought “a touch of the vapors” meant that she fell faint, as women were wont to do in the 18th and 19th centuries. That’s why it didn’t make sense to me. Thanks.

You are correct. ‘A touch of the vapours’ did indeed refer to faintness.

I also think the other anecdote re the Queen deliberately knocking over her wine glass is complete rubbish. She would never cause the serving staff unnecessary work and fuss.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

The Bishops in the UK have reinstated the rule of abstaining from meat on Fridays as they felt that very few people were performing an alternative penance. In my experience at least, it appears to have fallen on deaf ears as very few people actually observe the Friday abstinence . To be honest I can’t get my head around it. How can something be sinful in one part of the world and not sinful in another part of the world. Surely God’s law and his Church is universal.

Actually, I am glad to know this. Given the overall ignorance of the Faith that we have in the Church in this country, if Friday abstinence were again to be imposed in the US as it is in the UK, I wouldn’t want to see another pain-of-mortal-sin obligation imposed upon people who aren’t equipped to handle it. Put another way, would it be a good thing to put people in bad faith over something like this, to impose yet another need to abstain from communion and go to confession? I’d like to see it reimposed, as it is the UK, but with no penalty attached, rather, an invitation to do something that is even more pleasing to Almighty God and beneficial to one’s salvation.

The Church has no authority to depart from the words of Our Lord in Scripture, Luke 13:3 (DRV), “No, I say to you: but unless you shall do penance, you shall all likewise perish”, but she can leave the exact means up to the discretion of the faithful. The Friday abstinence could simply be presented as an expectation of the Church, not strictly an obligation, a way to do penance that has deep roots in Catholic tradition.