Lenten Fast Rules, Re-revisited

[aetratus]

This is in reference to Fr. Serpa’s Lenten Fast answer. He quotes the Apostolic Constitution On Penance of Paul VI: “The law of fasting allows only one full meal a day, but does not prohibit taking some food in the morning and evening, observing—as far as quantity and quality are concerned—approved local custom.” Then he concludes with an inference by Jimmy Akin based on said document which includes the following: “It simply says that you can have ‘some food’ two other times besides your full meal.”

Now, call me crazy (too late), but I don’t see “two other times” a day mentioned in the Apostolic Constitution On Penance; the closest I see to “two other times” is “taking some food in the morning and evening.” How is this construed as meaning “two other times” per day?

I ask because I am a Celiac who suffers from malabsorption of nutrients (my doctor is currently having tests run on my blood to determine vitamin and mineral levels, which he suspects are well below par), and I do not normally eat three meals a day. In fact I seldom eat meals but “snack” constantly, so as not to throw more at my gut than it can handle at one time and to keep my energy level up. Further, some days I can “get by” on four or five “snacks,” but on particularly active days I require more.

Would it not be keeping with the fast observance to simply limit my caloric intake to something less than my body demanded? Or am I better off going to a priest to receive a formal approval of same?

 

[catholicmessage]

Exceptions are generally made for a person who has a medical condition that requires them to eat more frequently than others, such as Diabetes or a condition such as you have. You may want to discuss your situation with a priest to determine if there is some other suitable sacrifice you can make rather than fasting and abstaining.

 

[Andreas_Hofer]

This is in reference to Fr. Serpa’s Lenten Fast answer. He quotes the Apostolic Constitution On Penance of Paul VI: “The law of fasting allows only one full meal a day, but does not prohibit taking some food in the morning and evening, observing—as far as quantity and quality are concerned—approved local custom.” Then he concludes with an inference by Jimmy Akin based on said document which includes the following: “It simply says that you can have ‘some food’ two other times besides your full meal.”

Now, call me crazy (too late), but I don’t see “two other times” a day mentioned in the Apostolic Constitution On Penance; the closest I see to “two other times” is “taking some food in the morning and evening.” How is this construed as meaning “two other times” per day?

I ask because I am a Celiac who suffers from malabsorption of nutrients (my doctor is currently having tests run on my blood to determine vitamin and mineral levels, which he suspects are well below par), and I do not normally eat three meals a day. In fact I seldom eat meals but “snack” constantly, so as not to throw more at my gut than it can handle at one time and to keep my energy level up. Further, some days I can “get by” on four or five “snacks,” but on particularly active days I require more.

Would it not be keeping with the fast observance to simply limit my caloric intake to something less than my body demanded? Or am I better off going to a priest to receive a formal approval of same?

I think you’re argument correctly points out that taking food in the morning and evening does not necessarily limit that to once in the morning and once in the evening, but I would offer two further observations:

1. this is to be done in accordance with local custom, which is clearly only once in morning and evening, and also meant to be less than what one would typically consider a “full meal”
2. medical concerns dispense from the fast anyway, so you don’t have to worry about the strict requirements of the fast - try to approximate it as best you can

 

[Joe_Kelley]

If you have a medical condition, the fast is to stick to your approved diet.

Some fasting from TV is a good substitute.

 

[MusicMan]

Our fasting rules are really a joke, aren’t they? It seems like everyone is always trying to find a new “loophole” in the interpretation so that we’re not asking too much of the faithful. The ones for my Diocese this year actually instructed Catholics to consume a meal.

The way the fasting rules are currently being stated/enforced, skipping your 2:00 pm Snickers bar and can of Pepsi on Ash Wednesday qualifies as fasting.

 

[puzzleannie]

no one who is ill, pregnant or nursing and must eat certain things at certain times was ever held to the fasting rules in any case, and there is no need to ask a priest for a dispensation, your own prudential judgement is enough. the general guidelines on penitential practices make it clear that some penance is required during lent and on all fridays of the year, and that we are free to substitute some other act of abstinence, prayer or good works if we cannot do what is prescribed.

 

[rwibo]

One post here suggested to give up TV, I have always been taught to give up something you love to have or do, TV was mine for Lent this year. So as not to ruin the intention; today I was with my mother and we was on the subject. I said that I thought she taught me to end Lent on Easter Sunday so I can watch TV then, but now she has informed me that Holy Thursday is end of Lent and I can watch TV starting at midnight or 12am Thursday morning. Can someone give factual advice, so as I don’t want to ruin my intention for my Lord. After all He did die for my sins. Can I begin watching TV on Holy Thurs morning at 12am?