Fish on Friday to Help Fish Mongers?

[kalt]

Is this a question for the Aplogetics board? I didnt think so, so I’m asking it here.

Many people believe that we have fish on Fridays because a Pope “back when” decided to create this discipline to help his buddies who were fish mongers Apparenlty the Vatican had a stake in the fish industry, according to this story.

What is the truth about meatless Fridays? When did it start? Who started it? Why no meat on Friday? Why not no milk or bread on Friday, instead? Was this to promote fish consumption?

IMO, no meat on Friday doens’t nec. mean fish on Friday.

 

[mschrank]

I’m sure this thread will be moved to where it belongs. This is not appropriate for “non Catholic religions” since it pertains to Catholicism.

Anyway, not sure how it got started but I think it has to do with warm blooded vs. cold blooded animals. Fish is also more expensive and harder to get.

I admit, it’s a strange one, but for me it works out practically as a good penance. This year, my wife and I gave up meat during lent (whilst eating fish).

 

[JMBNH]

Originally all Wednesdays and Fridays were I believe total fast days (whether this means no food at all or merely no food til sunset I am not sure), though in some churches (the Coptic Orthodox comes to mind) every fast day of which over half the year is requires no food til preferably sunset (3 is permissable if you can’t do the full version) and all animal products, alcohol and olive oil are forbidden. Thus meat on Friday was never allowed (til Vatican 2), but the allowing fish was most probably a Middle Ages liberalisation, the reason I don’t know though the idea of an official fishmongers for the whole of Christendom in pre-refrigerator days is absurd

 

[Rocky]

When the Church put in the discipline of fasting, it allowed fish and not meat because at the time fish was the food of the poor, meat the food of the wealthy. So this discipline was a way for Church members (especially the wealthy) to identify with the poor. I have heard many times from the pulpit that when we fast by eating less (or not as expensive food—fish nowadays can be very expensive—more so than meat!) it is recommended that any money we save should be given to the poor through food banks or other charities that deal with them directly.

 

[lizaanne]

…the idea of an official fishmongers for the whole of Christendom in pre-refrigerator days is absurd

Thank you!!

Where some folks come up with some of the stuff I read on here just makes me wonder.

~Liza

 

[thomasf]

What I’ve been told is that the meatless fridays are in line with the idea of penance and fasting on fridays. All fridays. And that in latin, the word for meat is meant to cover animal flesh, excluding fish. Fish has its own word. So the meatless fridays thing does not cover fish by definition, so fish has always been allowed.

And when you think of it, if fish and meat were the same thing in english, we wouldn’t have two different words for them in english either. But we do. So they aren’t.

 

[PaulDupre]

Also, since Fridays (a la Good Friday) are days to especially remember Jesus’ sacrifice at Calvary, and the fish is a symbol of Jesus, the eating of fish should be a symbolic way to call Him to mind.

Paul

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I have been reading this book, “Taste: The Story of Britain Through Its Cooking” by Kate Colquohoun, copyright 2007.
ISBN-10 1 -59691-410-6.

Interestingly, on page 96 this is the following:

. . .The Dissolution of the Monasteries changed at a stroke the way the countryside looked and the rules according to which people ate. The monks, their masses and their fish-ponds disappeared. Roman Catholicism became treasonable.
By the time the London guilds of salt fish-mongers and stockfish-mongers merged to form the Worshipful Company of Fishmongers, fish days had already begun to lose their force.* In 1541 ** Henry proclaimed that eggs, cheese, and milk could all now be included in fast-day diets; total Lenten abstinence was abandoned, and the number of holy days was reduced by three-quarters. Apart from the religiously tumultous handful of years under the hard-line Protestant King Edward VI and, later, his Catholic half-sister Mary, a middle ground was reached: ** fast days were maintained by law in order to protect the fishing industy*, and most people ate fish on Fridays and Saturdays. . .*

• Henry married Anne Boleyn in 1533 --thus this is 8 years after he ‘broke’ with Rome.

Do you see that the 'maintenance of the fast days was by law (not by a Pope), and that it was apart from the years of Edward and Mary-- IOW, this was not a product of the 5 year Catholic reign of Mary-- that the ‘fishing industry’ was protected. Further, had it not ‘suited’ the Protestant Elizabeth, there is no doubt it could have been abrogated.

I must admit that I was surprised (in a way) to see this. Not because I had thought that the ‘story’ of the "popes and the fishing industry’ was true. . .but that the ‘real’ story is diametrically opposite to the story that some Protestants tell.

Not the Pope: The King.
Not the Catholics: The Protestants.

It isn’t even a ‘bad’ thing to protect an industry per se. Considering the state of the economy (and one of Henry’s really good acts was his institution and support of the British navy), one could see that ‘helping out’ the fishing industry was a good thing.

But look how the story has been turned around by some to make it appear that it was a gigantic ‘papish’ plot to force people into ‘eating fish’ and how rather than supporting an economic industry it’s made to appear as a sinister act to bolster up those awful Catholics.

Interesting, isn’t it??

 

[kalt]

I have been reading this book, “Taste: The Story of Britain Through Its Cooking” by Kate Colquohoun, copyright 2007.
ISBN-10 1 -59691-410-6.

Interestingly, on page 96 this is the following:

. . .The Dissolution of the Monasteries changed at a stroke the way the countryside looked and the rules according to which people ate. The monks, their masses and their fish-ponds disappeared. Roman Catholicism became treasonable.
By the time the London guilds of salt fish-mongers and stockfish-mongers merged to form the Worshipful Company of Fishmongers, fish days had already begun to lose their force.* In 1541 *** Henry proclaimed that eggs, cheese, and milk could all now be included in fast-day diets; total Lenten abstinence was abandoned, and the number of holy days was reduced by three-quarters. Apart from the religiously tumultous handful of years under the hard-line Protestant King Edward VI and, later, his Catholic half-sister Mary, a middle ground was reached: ** fast days were maintained by law in order to protect the fishing industy*, and most people ate fish on Fridays and Saturdays. . .

• Henry married Anne Boleyn in 1533 --thus this is 8 years after he ‘broke’ with Rome.

Do you see that the 'maintenance of the fast days was by law (not by a Pope), and that it was apart from the years of Edward and Mary-- IOW, this was not a product of the 5 year Catholic reign of Mary-- that the ‘fishing industry’ was protected. Further, had it not ‘suited’ the Protestant Elizabeth, there is no doubt it could have been abrogated.

I must admit that I was surprised (in a way) to see this. Not because I had thought that the ‘story’ of the "popes and the fishing industry’ was true. . .but that the ‘real’ story is diametrically opposite to the story that some Protestants tell.

Not the Pope: The King.
Not the Catholics: The Protestants.

It isn’t even a ‘bad’ thing to protect an industry per se. Considering the state of the economy (and one of Henry’s really good acts was his institution and support of the British navy), one could see that ‘helping out’ the fishing industry was a good thing.

But look how the story has been turned around by some to make it appear that it was a gigantic ‘papish’ plot to force people into ‘eating fish’ and how rather than supporting an economic industry it’s made to appear as a sinister act to bolster up those awful Catholics.

Interesting, isn’t it??

Thank-you! It’s funny how there is a grain of truth to most stories. That little grain gets twisted, but there it is!

Thank-you so much for that info. Now I’ll have a legit. response to that twisted tale.

 

[LilyM]

We’ve got to remember too that never at any time has it ever been made compulsory by the church to eat fish on any day.

Sure, it’s been made verboten to eat warm-blooded meat, but I’d guess a lot of people right from the earliest days onwards have done as I and many others still do, and simply eat vegetables.

Not that I dislike seafood but I don’t go out of my way to have it on Fridays or other days of abstinence. Cheese and/or eggs and/or plain old vegetables suit me just fine.

Surely if the purpose of abstinence was to increase consumption of fish the Church would have made it binding that we must in fact … umm … eat fish

 

[LaMar]

What is the truth about meatless Fridays? When did it start? Who started it? Why no meat on Friday? Why not no milk or bread on Friday, instead? Was this to promote fish consumption?

IMO, no meat on Friday doens’t nec. mean fish on Friday.

The Friday fish meal was a sacrament in ancient Egypt.

The idea was that one of the Ancient Egyptian gods (can’t remember who) was cut up into pieces and thrown into the Nile. Crocodiles resurrected this fellow, and a fish meal is eaten on Friday out of respect for the Egyptian crocodile god.

When I went to Egypt there was an exhibit which recreated the temple to this crocodile god. Apparently they had crocodiles in a man-made lake, and the Egyptian monks who were part of whatever order that took care of them would dress the crocodiles up in jewelry. This seems funny now, but it was very serious business to these guys.

So, there’s an idea that Christians took on, and Christianized, and we’re still discussing it after 5000 years.

 

[LilyM]

The Friday fish meal was a sacrament in ancient Egypt.

The idea was that one of the Ancient Egyptian gods (can’t remember who) was cut up into pieces and thrown into the Nile. Crocodiles resurrected this fellow, and a fish meal is eaten on Friday out of respect for the Egyptian crocodile god.

When I went to Egypt there was an exhibit which recreated the temple to this crocodile god. Apparently they had crocodiles in a man-made lake, and the Egyptian monks who were part of whatever order that took care of them would dress the crocodiles up in jewelry. This seems funny now, but it was very serious business to these guys.

So, there’s an idea that Christians took on, and Christianized, and we’re still discussing it after 5000 years.

But we haven’t ever HAD ritual Friday fish meals, sacramental or otherwise, so it’s not at all the same thing

As we’ve been saying, no meat meant no meat, didn’t ever mean it was compulsory to eat fish. More often than not it was simply bread, water and vegetables.

 

[LaMar]

But we haven’t ever HAD ritual Friday fish meals, sacramental or otherwise, so it’s not at all the same thing

It’s exactly the same thing. Only the explanations for the custom have changed.

It’s like May Day, which started out in Sumeria, went into Judaism. You guys celebrate it with flowers in baskets. Socialists celebrate it with parades.

This Sunday we’ll be celebrating the fertility festival of Ishtar/Astaroth/Easter – the holiday is 2700 years older than any idea of Jesus.

Same ideas, different trappings and explanations around them. That’s what’s so interesting. People are fascinated by the same things, and choose the same symbols to express the same concepts, irrelevant to race, religion or era. Cool, huh?

 

[LilyM]

It’s exactly the same thing. Only the explanations for the custom have changed.

It’s like May Day, which started out in Sumeria, went into Judaism. You guys celebrate it with flowers in baskets. Socialists celebrate it with parades.

This Sunday we’ll be celebrating the fertility festival of Ishtar/Astaroth/Easter – the holiday is 2700 years older than any idea of Jesus.

Same ideas, different trappings and explanations around them. That’s what’s so interesting. People are fascinated by the same things, and choose the same symbols to express the same concepts, irrelevant to race, religion or era. Cool, huh?

Rot. Totally different ideas. Take Easter - we’re not celebrating fertility at all. What we ARE celebrating is a continuation and extension of the Jewish festival of Passover, which commemorates the delivery of the Jews from slavery by God. They were protected and delivered by the blood of the sacrificial lamb smeared over their doorposts. In Christian terms, this was a prefigurement of Christ’s own death (He too is the sacrificial lamb offered to save mankind from God’s punishment and wrath).

 

[LilyM]

It’s exactly the same thing. Only the explanations for the custom have changed.

It’s like May Day, which started out in Sumeria, went into Judaism. You guys celebrate it with flowers in baskets. Socialists celebrate it with parades.

This Sunday we’ll be celebrating the fertility festival of Ishtar/Astaroth/Easter – the holiday is 2700 years older than any idea of Jesus.

Same ideas, different trappings and explanations around them. That’s what’s so interesting. People are fascinated by the same things, and choose the same symbols to express the same concepts, irrelevant to race, religion or era. Cool, huh?

Rot. May Day is nowhere a Christian festival for starters. Totally secular. And I don’t know of anyone in this country who does celebrate it with flowers or anything else.

And you have a completely wrong idea of what we’re celebrating this weekend.

What we ARE celebrating is a continuation and extension of the Jewish (not pagan) festival of Passover, which commemorates the delivery of the Jews from slavery by God. They were protected from His punishment which smote the Egyptians by the blood of the sacrificial lamb which they smeared over their doorposts.

In Christian terms, this was a prefigurement of Christ’s own death (He too is the sacrificial lamb whose blood is offered to save mankind from God’s punishment and wrath and who delivers us from our own slavery to sin).

In fact we remember at this time that HE himself celebrated this same Passover meal just prior to His own death. Fertility comes into it precisely nowhere, neither does Ishtar or Ashtaroth or whoever.

 

[PaulDupre]

The idea that Catholics are required to eat fish on Fridays is one of those comical misconceptions about Catholicism. I have heard it many times.

Paul

 

[LaMar]

The idea that Catholics are required to eat fish on Fridays is one of those comical misconceptions about Catholicism. I have heard it many times.

Paul

Here’s another funny culture-clash for ya.

My brother and his wife left Utah for the first time as adults (not that we’d never been on vacation, but to live). He went to Columbia University to work on a master degree.

Anyway, they decided to settle in a town called Yonkers, which was the only place they could afford, because my sister-in-law was expecting and they needed something larger than a shoebox. They moved into a little house in a very mixed race/ethnicity/religion neighborhood.

First spring they’re there, they get a little bit flabbergasted by all the baskets that start showing up on the doorstep, after kids rang and ran away. They don’t know what it was all about.

Eventually, the neighbors clued them in to the fact that if there are flowers in the baskets, then it’s Catholic kids celebrating May Day. If there’s food in them, then it’s Jewish kids celebrating Purim. I guess since both tribes didn’t know exactly where the new people belonged, they were just adopted de facto by both.

 

[latin_rite]

It’s exactly the same thing. Only the explanations for the custom have changed.

It’s like May Day, which started out in Sumeria, went into Judaism. You guys celebrate it with flowers in baskets. Socialists celebrate it with parades.

This Sunday we’ll be celebrating the fertility festival of Ishtar/Astaroth/Easter – the holiday is 2700 years older than any idea of Jesus.

Same ideas, different trappings and explanations around them. That’s what’s so interesting. People are fascinated by the same things, and choose the same symbols to express the same concepts, irrelevant to race, religion or era. Cool, huh?

Every time around Easter I see pagans coming on line saying how we stole Easter or copied it. What the confusion is about Easter for pagans is simple. To them Easter sounds like ishtar. They seem to think Easter is some English variant of the word ishtar. Easter is a English translation of the old Germanic of ester which basically means resurrection . In fact Germany and English speaking countries are the only two places where the word Easter is commonly used. In most languages the word for Easter is exactly the same as the word for Passover, so the relationship between the feast of Passover and the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is directly linked. A few examples are; Latin Pascha, French PⱵes, Italian Pasqua, and Dutch Pasen. All these words mean both Easter and Passover, only the context formulates the difference. With the exception of English and German, all other European languages do not have a separate word for Easter and Passover, but simply use a single term derived from Pesach, the Hebrew word for Passover. When the bible was being translated into the Latin language in the fourth century, when translating the word Pascha, which can mean both Passover and Easter, Jerome simply used the same Greek word without creating a new Latin word in its place, thus the word Pascha was basically un-translated. In fact wasn’t until Tyndale gave us the word Easter in his translation and then also inventing the term Passover. Ultimately this gave us two separate words for two distinct occasions. It must be noted that the term Ester (later Easter) was used much more frequently in common literature to denote the Passover and the celebration of the resurrection than Pask ever was. I could go on and on about how Easter and ishtar have nothing in common.
And by the way I have never celebrated mayday in my life. Nor do I know of anyone personally who has, be they catholic protestant or even atheist/communist.

 

[LaMar]

OK, so Christians celebrate a holiday named Easter, with icons like rabbits, eggs and such things. Even though it’s named after Ishtar the fertility goddess, it really has nothing to do with fertility or eggs or rabbits who have zillions of babies, or springtime or renewal or the rebirth of flowers. Even though it’s pretty self-evident that it’s a pre-Christian holiday (which you admit yourself with references to Pesach, etc.) it’s actually not a pre-Christian holiday. It’s all about Jesus.

Sounds fine to me. In the end it’s about how you see the tradition.

As an aside, I’ve studied languages for about 15 years now. Your etymology could use some work.

religioustolerance.org/easter1.htm

There’s an old saying from Shakespeare, in plain English. “methinks the lady doth protest too much”. Look it up in context and read this response with that in mind. You Catholics seem to be the most contentious and insecure people I have ever seen. Every single comment devolves into bickering and hatred. It’s damn near pathological, and pretty amusing for us newcomers.

 

[PaulDupre]

Here’s another funny culture-clash for ya.

My brother and his wife left Utah for the first time as adults (not that we’d never been on vacation, but to live). He went to Columbia University to work on a master degree.

Anyway, they decided to settle in a town called Yonkers, which was the only place they could afford, because my sister-in-law was expecting and they needed something larger than a shoebox. They moved into a little house in a very mixed race/ethnicity/religion neighborhood.

First spring they’re there, they get a little bit flabbergasted by all the baskets that start showing up on the doorstep, after kids rang and ran away. They don’t know what it was all about.

Eventually, the neighbors clued them in to the fact that if there are flowers in the baskets, then it’s Catholic kids celebrating May Day. If there’s food in them, then it’s Jewish kids celebrating Purim. I guess since both tribes didn’t know exactly where the new people belonged, they were just adopted de facto by both.

That’s cute. I hope they took it in the spirit it was offered.

Paul