People taught that lenten fasting is optional

[Mariem2]

But anyone reading the article who was not familiar with Catholic law would have gotten the distinct impression that fasting from food is both optional and less desirable than fasting from these other things.

Whatever about your diocese/country, it is not Catholic law in every diocese throughout the world to abstain from meat or fast on every Friday during Lent. Ash Wednesday and Good Friday are the only days where fast and abstinence are mandatory for all Catholics. The situation in some countries is similar to what Brendan said - Friday abstinence is recommended but optional and where the faithful don’t abstain they are recommended to do some other kind of penance or an act of charity.

Abstaining from meat in countries where doing so is no hardship or in countries where people rarely see meat makes little sense as an act of penance or obedience.

 

[jmcrae]

Abstaining from meat in countries where doing so is no hardship or in countries where people rarely see meat makes little sense as an act of penance or obedience.

We don’t abstain from meat because it’s hard - we abstain from meat in order to join Christ on the Cross as He gives up His flesh (his “meat”) for our sins. Whether it’s easy or hard for us to do so is beside the point; the point is the symbolism of meat as flesh.

 

[Mariem2]

Well, evidently our bishops think we will be more like Christ on the cross if we do some penance and/or an act of charity. I’m glad I don’t live in Canada.

 

[jmcrae]

Well, evidently our bishops think we will be more like Christ on the cross if we do some penance and/or an act of charity. I’m glad I don’t live in Canada.

You’re still not getting the meat/flesh connection.

 

[Mariem2]

I think it’s silly symbolism. Just because they forego steak on a Friday, Canadians, living in one of the richest countries in the world, are more in tune with Christ crucified than poor Catholics who never see meat. Some symbolism is best relegated to history.

 

[babochka]

I live in the UK and, as far as I’m aware, abstinence fro meat is only compulsory on Ash Wednesday and good Friday.

As to it being a mortal sin to fail to observe this? I seriously doubt whether failing to abstain from meat would be considered a ‘grave violation of God’s law’ and would end up damning someone to Hell as a result.

I thought that the Bishops in England and Wales had reinstated Friday abstinence year round a couple of years ago.

catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2011/05/16/the-restoration-of-the-friday-fast-is-a-historic-day-for-english-and-welsh-catholics/

 

[curlycool89]

It makes little sense for something to be a grave violation of God’s law one week, whereas the week before it wasn’t.

It is a violation though, because we are commanded to show obedience to legitimate superiors (it falls under the 4th commandment). That includes the Church where She has commanded that we observe something.

Well, evidently our bishops think we will be more like Christ on the cross if we do some penance and/or an act of charity. I’m glad I don’t live in Canada.

Dude, that was an unnecessary shot.

 

[Mariem2]

Dude, that was an unnecessary shot.

Yes it was and I apologise. I have just noticed that this thread is in the “Traditional” section. I will have to learn how to use this forum properly and avoid some sections. I always regarded myself as a traditional Catholic until I joined this forum. I realise now that I’m just a common or garden Catholic…struggling to do my best to scrape into purgatory but never good enough to make the direct route to Heaven.

 

[yellow8yellowM]

Judging by what I have hear from family and friends, and from the other posts in this thread, I think this hits the nail on the head.

I can see how people might think they are being told that it’s optional when they hear Church leaders say, “Fast from gossip, it’s better than fasting from food,” and things like that.

I hope that the leaders are simply taking it for granted that everyone knows they have to fast from food, but if someone is a little hazy on the concept to start with, then it could really seem like the leader is telling them that they have a choice of things to fast from, or that fasting is optional.

We had an article in our Diocesan newsletter that was rhapsodizing on about the glories of fasting from various sinful behaviours during Lent, without ever mentioning the fact that fasting from food is still a requirement of the Church, and that there is no “instead of” involved - we fast from food by law and requirement, and then fast from other things by choice, in addition to fasting from food.

But anyone reading the article who was not familiar with Catholic law would have gotten the distinct impression that fasting from food is both optional and less desirable than fasting from these other things.

 

[Brendan_64]

If he says it’s “strongly encouraged” then go ahead and do it.

After all, if your boss, who has less authority over your life than your Bishop does, were to say to you, “I strongly encourage you to [whatever],” you would certainly do it, wouldn’t you?

Of course. But the discussion is about whether it is sinful or not to do so.

If it is strongly encouraged, but not stated as compulsory, then to not do so is not an act of disobedience, therefore it cannot be considered to be a sin of any sort (not even venial).

And there have been many things that my boss at work has said to me that he/she would strongly encourage me to do that I haven’t done. In those circumstances I would satop and ask myself, “Does what I’m being asked to do have sufficient value, and is it more crucial than other actions I have planned to do in order to meet my plans?” At work I’ll be judged, in the end, by the overall result of my plans, not on whether or not I have followed everything my boss has recommended me to do.

 

[Brendan_64]

I always regarded myself as a traditional Catholic until I joined this forum.

Likewise. In fact I always regarded myself as a traditional Catholic until I started posting on CAF in general.

Perhaps the term ‘mainstream Catholic’ would be best to the describe the likes of us?