E
exiled
Guest
What is the historical and supernatural significance of not eating meat on Fridays?
- Status
T
Tomster
Guest
Historically, after teaching us how to pray, Jesus spoke of fasting (Matthew 6:16-18). In addition to such solemn public fasts as the Day of Atonement and New Year the pious Jew kept many private fasts. We know that these were observed by the disciples of St. John the Baptist and by the Pharisees (Mark 2:18 & Luke 18:12). The latter had the custom of keeping them on Monday and Thursday; the primitive Christians, to distinguish themselves, chose Wednesday and Friday.
Supernaturally, riches and worldly cares come next under review (Matthew 6:19-34; Luke 12:33-34, 11:34-36, 16:13, 12:22-31, being the parallels). “Do not lay up for yourselves treasures upon earth . . .; For where thy treasure is, there will be thy heart also” (Matthew 6:19-21). The test of the thing we most prize is what claims our individual attention. The only way to heaven, says Cardinal Newman, is the desire for heaven. It is a fitting comment on our Lord’s teaching.
“Seek first the Kingdom of God.”
C
CapIV
Guest
Personally, I think the “no red blooded meat” thing is a bit outdated.
Thomas Aquinas gave a very good reason initially, which I agree with however. Back in the day, (and still today for most people I guess) meat brings pleasure. One not only has a hearty meal when eating meat, but it is quite obviously the tastiest thing ever. Whereas fish, (according to Aquinas) had a nastier taste that did not bring immediate pleasure to the eater.
Now this argument would still hold if it meant that all Catholics instead of eating meat on Fridays ate mackerel. (which is what they would have eaten wake back when and is the origin of the term “Mackerel Snapper”.) But I mean nowadays, many people don’t eat red meat anyway or they are vegetarian, so it is hardly an abstinence for them. Or they go, “I can’t eat meat today? Fine. I’ll go get a lobster with a side of salmon!”
On the other hand, tradition is good for traditions sake.
Thomas Aquinas gave a very good reason initially, which I agree with however. Back in the day, (and still today for most people I guess) meat brings pleasure. One not only has a hearty meal when eating meat, but it is quite obviously the tastiest thing ever. Whereas fish, (according to Aquinas) had a nastier taste that did not bring immediate pleasure to the eater.
Now this argument would still hold if it meant that all Catholics instead of eating meat on Fridays ate mackerel. (which is what they would have eaten wake back when and is the origin of the term “Mackerel Snapper”.) But I mean nowadays, many people don’t eat red meat anyway or they are vegetarian, so it is hardly an abstinence for them. Or they go, “I can’t eat meat today? Fine. I’ll go get a lobster with a side of salmon!”
On the other hand, tradition is good for traditions sake.
E
exiled
Guest
Many thanks. I love CAF!!
I
Ilroy
Guest
If they are coming at it with this attitude they are not following the spirit of abstinence. It is supposed to be a sacrifice to help us join ourselves to Christ in this time of preparation for Good Friday and Easter. Rather than lobster or some such thing they might be better to have a can of tuna…dry…or maybe some cheap fish sticks…
T
Tim_in_MI
Guest
Or you can go this Friday to support your local Catholic K of C Hall or Parish to partake in their Lenten fish fry! It’s not mackerel, but it isn’t red meat either - and the cause is a great one. Our local parish has a great FF every Friday during Lent, and it really brings the parish (and our surrounding community) together 
A
adam_in_ohio
Guest
Friday is the day Jesus died on the cross. So we are asked to do penance on friday. During lent we are told not to eat meat as a penance. It use to be every friday we were to abstane from meat but now it’s only during lent.
The reasion for meat is that waaaaay back before our modern times meat was not as cheep as it is for us today. So eating meat was not an every day thing.
How often do you think an average person had an option for steak around 1000 AD? If they had a steak it would not be a penance.
The reasion for meat is that waaaaay back before our modern times meat was not as cheep as it is for us today. So eating meat was not an every day thing.
How often do you think an average person had an option for steak around 1000 AD? If they had a steak it would not be a penance.
M
Miles_Mariae
Guest
I really really enjoy red meat so this still works for me.
- Status