Do we really have to abstain from meat onFridays?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Thorns
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

Thorns

Guest
I overheard a Catholic woman speak to a Protestant yesterday saying that Catholics dont really have to abstain on Fridays during Lent, but its nice if you do, since its not a sin because God never instructed to abstain.

I cringed at first, but then it got me thinking…

If abstaining from meat on Fridays during Lent is simply a Discipline and not a matter of Doctrine, then technically it isnt infallible and therefore not binding. So under that, it would appear one doesnt actually have to abstain.

Thoughts?
 
A disciplinary rule is still a rule. The fact that it is disciplinary does not suddenly make it a suggestion instead if a rule.

Disciplinary rules are binding as long as they exist.
 
Do we really have to abstain from meat on Fridays?

My understanding is that we do.
 
Alindawyl said:
A disciplinary rule is still a rule. The fact that it is disciplinary does not suddenly make it a suggestion instead if a rule.

Disciplinary rules are binding as long as they exist.
Click to expand...
I thought only infallible statements were binding?
 
Although the Bible does not command us to abstain from meat on Friday, the Bible does command us to obey our leaders and submit to them. (Hebrew 13:17) If our leaders command us as a disciplinary practice to abstain from meat on Fridays, then it is just as binding as any other commandment in the Bible. Remember Jesus’ words to Peter, “Whatever you declare bound on earth shall be bound in heaven; whatever you declare loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (Matthew 16:19)

It is my understanding that, at least outside of Lent, mortal sin is not ascribed to those who do not abstain from meat on Friday.
 
Thorns said:
I thought only infallible statements were binding?
Click to expand...
No, only infallible statements are infallible. Infallibility has to do with truth, right? Abstinence from meat is not a matter of truth, it’s a matter of discipline, so we can’t really talk about “infallible vs. fallible” here in the first place. It is not a matter of faith to abstain from meat on Fridays. It is a matter of discipline.

However, one command from God is that we must do penance. That is a matter of faith. The Church has traditionally instituted this as an obligation on Fridays–death of Christ on Friday–and furthermore the traditional penance is to abstain from meat. This is absolutely required during Lent (within the regulations of age and other stuff which I am too lazy to Google right now). On all other Fridays of the year, you may either abstain from meat or “pick yer’ own” penance; I won’t discuss the merit of that, but you can do it.

The Church can bind and command things which are disciplinary in nature. The Church has the ability and the authority to do this. So God says, “You must do penance,” and the Church simply translates that into concrete words like, “Don’t eat meat on Fridays.”

This lady was wrong.
 
Thorns said:
I overheard a Catholic woman speak to a Protestant yesterday saying that Catholics dont really have to abstain on Fridays during Lent, but its nice if you do, since its not a sin because God never instructed to abstain.

I cringed at first, but then it got me thinking…

If abstaining from meat on Fridays during Lent is simply a Discipline and not a matter of Doctrine, then technically it isnt infallible and therefore not binding. So under that, it would appear one doesnt actually have to abstain.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
My thoughts:

In the Old Testament Books of the Maccabees, there is an entire Jewish family in which each family member chose terrible torture and then death rather than eat that which was forbidden by their laws/rules. Mind you, it was a law/rule that was just temporary, we are now permitted to eat shell fish & pork, etc.

There is a young Orthodox Saint that was starved, beaten & killed by his Muslim slave master for refusing to eat that which is only forbidden during one of the many fasting periods through out the year: dairy, meat/fish & olive oil, but is acceptable to eat at any other time during the year. This Martyr was offered an abundance of these temporarily forbidden foods every day, but he refused to give into this temptation which enraged his captors.

As long as it is a law/rule, even if in the future it could be changed, I think it ought to be obeyed with the same vigor as that Maccabeen family did & as that holy Orthodox Martyr did.

But that being said, we are humans are prone to failure of the ideal and that is when we can receive the Mystery of Confession/Reconciliation, yet we still ought to strive to walk without falling.
 
YoungTradCath said:
No, only infallible statements are infallible. Infallibility has to do with truth, right? Abstinence from meat is not a matter of truth, it’s a matter of discipline, so we can’t really talk about “infallible vs. fallible” here in the first place. It is not a matter of faith to abstain from meat on Fridays. It is a matter of discipline.

However, one command from God is that we must do penance. That is a matter of faith. The Church has traditionally instituted this as an obligation on Fridays–death of Christ on Friday–and furthermore the traditional penance is to abstain from meat. This is absolutely required during Lent (within the regulations of age and other stuff which I am too lazy to Google right now). On all other Fridays of the year, you may either abstain from meat or “pick yer’ own” penance; I won’t discuss the merit of that, but you can do it.

The Church can bind and command things which are disciplinary in nature. The Church has the ability and the authority to do this. So God says, “You must do penance,” and the Church simply translates that into concrete words like, “Don’t eat meat on Fridays.”

This lady was wrong.
Click to expand...
👍
 
Todd977 said:
It is my understanding that, at least outside of Lent, mortal sin is not ascribed to those who do not abstain from meat on Friday.
Click to expand...
My remarks are based on my reading of the Pastoral Statement on Penance and Abstinence issued by the (United States) National Conference of Catholic Bishops on November 18, 1966, which says, in part:
  1. Among the works of voluntary self-denial and personal penance which we especially commend to our people for the future observance of Friday, even though we hereby terminate the traditional law of abstinence binding under pain of sin, as the sole prescribed means of observing Friday, we give first place to abstinence from flesh meat. We do so in the hope that the Catholic community will ordinarily continue to abstain from meat by free choice as formerly we did in obedience to Church law.
 
Todd977 said:
My remarks are based on my reading of the Pastoral Statement on Penance and Abstinence issued by the (United States) National Conference of Catholic Bishops on November 18, 1966, which says, in part:
  1. Among the works of voluntary self-denial and personal penance which we especially commend to our people for the future observance of Friday, even though we hereby terminate the traditional law of abstinence binding under pain of sin, as the sole prescribed means of observing Friday, we give first place to abstinence from flesh meat. We do so in the hope that the Catholic community will ordinarily continue to abstain from meat by free choice as formerly we did in obedience to Church law.
Click to expand...
That is a derogation for the United States from the universal Canon Law. In countries where the episcopal conference has not specified otherwise, the universal Canon Law, which requires abstinence on all Fridays of the year, applies.
 
It is possible to get special dispensation to eat meat if deemed medically and nutritionally needed… my family had that in the 60’s because of my dad’s health - the argument was he needed the fast absorbed iron that only meat could provide… in hindsight we all know now that fish would have been far better for his heart and overall health… as medical knowledge improves and science expands- it all comes back to the simple rules that God provides…we should all start there as to what is acceptable…and trust God to handle the details… fish once a week is a fantastic gift to your overall health-Thank God and the Church that you are required to do it for at least a few weeks-and hopefully will continue that discipline on your own 👍
 
Why do you take it as a chore? Consider it a privilege to make a sacrifice.
 
JCnMe said:
It is possible to get special dispensation to eat meat if deemed medically and nutritionally needed… my family had that in the 60’s because of my dad’s health - the argument was he needed the fast absorbed iron that only meat could provide… in hindsight we all know now that fish would have been far better for his heart and overall health… as medical knowledge improves and science expands- it all comes back to the simple rules that God provides…we should all start there as to what is acceptable…and trust God to handle the details… fish once a week is a fantastic gift to your overall health-Thank God and the Church that you are required to do it for at least a few weeks-and hopefully will continue that discipline on your own 👍
Click to expand...
With economia, dispensations for anything can be received.

But wow - I find it amazing that Medical Doctors in the 1960’s deemed it unhealthy for your Dad to abstain from eating meat for just 6 days a year. I learned in health class (1980’s) that meat stays in the digestive track for at least 3 days, so even if he’d kept the Lenten Friday - No Meat, he still would have never gone a single day without meat in his body. Maybe, that information was unknown in the 1960’s.
 
Thorns said:
I overheard a Catholic woman speak to a Protestant yesterday saying that Catholics dont really have to abstain on Fridays during Lent, but its nice if you do, since its not a sin because God never instructed to abstain.

I cringed at first, but then it got me thinking…

If abstaining from meat on Fridays during Lent is simply a Discipline and not a matter of Doctrine, then technically it isnt infallible and therefore not binding. So under that, it would appear one doesnt actually have to abstain.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
I think that if we do something for God because we have to, we’ve missed the point. By the way, how hard is it not to eat meat on Fridays in Lent?
 
Thorns said:
I thought only infallible statements were binding?
Click to expand...
Infallibility has only been used twice in the entire history of the Church by Pius IX and Pius XII. Both had to do with the Blessed Virgin Mary.

Yet there are a ton of other issues that have not been Infallibly declared, but are still binding.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top