Meat vs Poultry

  • Thread starter Thread starter ensmitch
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
E

ensmitch

Guest
What I want to find out is why the dictionary defines meat with the exclusion of poultry but Catholics include poultry as meat and prohibits it on Fridays in Lent.
 
ensmitch said:
What I want to find out is why the dictionary defines meat with the exclusion of poultry but Catholics include poultry as meat and prohibits it on Fridays in Lent.
Click to expand...
Animals that live out of water.
 
The same dictionaries should also tell you that MEAT in at least one of its definitions simply means ANY food.

Clearly the definition of meat is incredibly flexible. Frequently in church documents it is ‘wam-blooded flesh’ that is referred to, for greater accuracy, not just ‘meat’.
 
ensmitch said:
What I want to find out is why the dictionary defines meat with the exclusion of poultry but Catholics include poultry as meat and prohibits it on Fridays in Lent.
Click to expand...
Chickens don’t have the best lives anyway. Maybe the CC is just giving them a break.
 
ensmitch said:
What I want to find out is why the dictionary defines meat with the exclusion of poultry but Catholics include poultry as meat and prohibits it on Fridays in Lent.
Click to expand...
Poultry is the general word for chickens, turkey, fowl while they are alive.
Meat is something from a dead animal or fowl.
 
“Meat” refers to the flesh of any warm-blooded animal.
To get any farther than that in understanding, you would need to discuss the matter with a Jewish leader, because the definition, and ,therefore, the distinction between one kind of flesh and another comes straight from Judaism & the laws of Kashrut (Kosher).
In Judaism, poultry is “meat” (fleishchig), and fish is neutral (pareve).
 
Thank you to all who replied to my question. I guess I have to remember that there is rarely any one meaning depending on your research materials.

My background has the tradition of not eating any warm-blooded animal, i.e. vegetarian or seafood, on Lenten Fridays.

But a friend of mine, who is also Catholic, has a family tradition of also allowing chicken on Fridays. She says that since the dictionary specifically points out that chicken is excluded from the definition of meat, then it is allowed.

And when I looked up the definition in The American Heritage Dictionary, Second College Edition, and found that it actually states,“The edible flesh of mammals, as distinguished from that of fish or poultry,” I was quitre surprised to find her position supported!

Perhaps church bulletins should include the “Catholic definition” of meat!
 
ensmitch said:
Thank you to all who replied to my question. I guess I have to remember that there is rarely any one meaning depending on your research materials.

My background has the tradition of not eating any warm-blooded animal, i.e. vegetarian or seafood, on Lenten Fridays.

But a friend of mine, who is also Catholic, has a family tradition of also allowing chicken on Fridays. She says that since the dictionary specifically points out that chicken is excluded from the definition of meat, then it is allowed.

And when I looked up the definition in The American Heritage Dictionary, Second College Edition, and found that it actually states,“The edible flesh of mammals, as distinguished from that of fish or poultry,” I was quitre surprised to find her position supported!

Perhaps church bulletins should include the “Catholic definition” of meat!
Click to expand...
For the Catholic definition of meat you should use a Catholic dictionary. The Modern Catholic Dictionary by Fr. John A. Hardon, S.J. is online:

therealpresence.org/dictionary/adict.htm

MEAT. The flesh of animals and birds eaten by human beings, as understood in Church law. Its prohibition on days of abstinence and fast has a spiritual value, going back to the Old Testament and practiced since apostolic times. “The law of abstinence forbids the use of meat, but not of eggs, the products of milk or condiments made of animal fat” (Pope Paul VI, Paenitemini, Norm III, 1).
 
Perfect! This was the type of answer I was looking for. Thank you so much for an excellent reply!!!
 
Actually the Canon Law of fasting and abstinence forbids the flesh of warm blooded animals on days or times of abstinence.
 
In a country, such as Japan, where meat is not as commonly eaten but fish is the main source of animal, how are the rules of abstinence applied?
 
We were told that Vatican II had changed the law regarding abstinence from meat on Fridays, but there was no such change in the documents of the council. The Church lifted the penalty of serious sin previously connected with the law of Friday abstinence, but continues to encourage that practice, as well as other forms of sacrifice on that day. Canon 1253 of the Code of Canon Law reaffirmed the ancient discipline, but Canon 1253 gave the bishops’ conferences the authority to determine more precisely the observance. In 1966, the National Conference of Catholic Bishops downgraded abstinence from flesh meat from an obligation to a special recommendation.
The above is a partial quote from a reply given in “Catholic Replies” by James J. Drummey in the March 12, 2009 edition of “The Wanderer” (www.thewandererpress.com).
It seems that many older folks still follow the practice of meatless Fridays - and do include poultry as meat - but I think the end result is that abstinence from meat is disregarded entirely. I recently heard from a respected Benedictine that eating fish could actually be a sin when done for the wrong reason. I can understand that from my own history when we used to fast scrupulously on Fridays during Lent, and then feast on lobster, shrimp or expensive fish at our “one full meal.”
 
giuseppemotti said:
We were told that Vatican II had changed the law regarding abstinence from meat on Fridays, but there was no such change in the documents of the council. The Church lifted the penalty of serious sin previously connected with the law of Friday abstinence, but continues to encourage that practice, as well as other forms of sacrifice on that day. Canon 1253 of the Code of Canon Law reaffirmed the ancient discipline, but Canon 1253 gave the bishops’ conferences the authority to determine more precisely the observance. In 1966, the National Conference of Catholic Bishops downgraded abstinence from flesh meat from an obligation to a special recommendation.
The above is a partial quote from a reply given in “Catholic Replies” by James J. Drummey in the March 12, 2009 edition of “The Wanderer” (www.thewandererpress.com).
It seems that many older folks still follow the practice of meatless Fridays - and do include poultry as meat - but I think the end result is that abstinence from meat is disregarded entirely. I recently heard from a respected Benedictine that eating fish could actually be a sin when done for the wrong reason. I can understand that from my own history when we used to fast scrupulously on Fridays during Lent, and then feast on lobster, shrimp or expensive fish at our “one full meal.”
Click to expand...
This is true outside of Lent only. During Lent, Catholic are still forbidden to abstain from meat on all Fridays in Lent as well as Ash Wednesday.

I go meatless on all Fridays.
 
Good point. I did not mean to include the days of fast and abstinence that remain.
 
giuseppemotti said:
Good point. I did not mean to include the days of fast and abstinence that remain.
Click to expand...
Not a problem. I was pretty sure that is what you meant, but I did not want some else to get confused. Thank you for the background about this. 👍

Oh, and welcome to CAF! 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top