Precepts of the Church - Changable Truth?

[Theophilus76]

I’m struggling with the idea of the 5 (or 7?) Catholic Precepts. My struggle has nothing to do with actually following them, but the philosophical idea of them.

My journey into this line of thinking began with the need to seek dispensation from Mass by a local priest for a weekend backpacking trip with my son. It was explained to my that observing the Sabbath and keeping it holy is the commandment, but mass attendance during days of obligation are a Church Precept. This distinction allows a priest to issue dispensations; its a free pass to a Church rule rather than a Biblical commandment - no one can dispense a Biblical commandment.

This got me thinking about the old directive of not eating meat on Fridays, and how this changed. Before, it was a mortal sin; afterwards, it wasn’t. So, the Church can change the gravity of a precept/rule, or even its definition in Cannon Law, over time.

This doesn’t make sense to me. How can God’s church create, modify, or remove certain activities beyond what God has commanded? If God is working through His church, and these Church rules/precepts are subject to change, how does this reconcile with the idea that God is unchangeable/unmoved? Truth is truth; it can’t change.

 

[Phemie]

I’m struggling with the idea of the 5 (or 7?) Catholic Precepts. My struggle has nothing to do with actually following them, but the philosophical idea of them.

My journey into this line of thinking began with the need to seek dispensation from Mass by a local priest for a weekend backpacking trip with my son. It was explained to my that observing the Sabbath and keeping it holy is the commandment, but mass attendance during days of obligation are a Church Precept. This distinction allows a priest to issue dispensations; its a free pass to a Church rule rather than a Biblical commandment - no one can dispense a Biblical commandment.

This got me thinking about the old directive of not eating meat on Fridays, and how this changed. Before, it was a mortal sin; afterwards, it wasn’t. So, the Church can change the gravity of a precept/rule, or even its definition in Cannon Law, over time.

This doesn’t make sense to me. How can God’s church create, modify, or remove certain activities beyond what God has commanded? If God is working through His church, and these Church rules/precepts are subject to change, how does this reconcile with the idea that God is unchangeable/unmoved? Truth is truth; it can’t change.

Jesus said, “Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven.” Matt. 18:18

Binding and loosing is originally a Jewish phrase appearing in the New Testament, as well as in the Targum. In usage, to bind and to loose simply means to forbid by an indisputable authority, and to permit by an indisputable authority.

The act of eating meat, therefore, is not sinful in itself; it is sinful when, in doing so, one is directly disobeying a rule established by an indisputable authority: the Pope. The sin is one of disobedience to the Church.

 

[porthos11]

I’m struggling with the idea of the 5 (or 7?) Catholic Precepts. My struggle has nothing to do with actually following them, but the philosophical idea of them.

My journey into this line of thinking began with the need to seek dispensation from Mass by a local priest for a weekend backpacking trip with my son. It was explained to my that observing the Sabbath and keeping it holy is the commandment, but mass attendance during days of obligation are a Church Precept. This distinction allows a priest to issue dispensations; its a free pass to a Church rule rather than a Biblical commandment - no one can dispense a Biblical commandment.

This got me thinking about the old directive of not eating meat on Fridays, and how this changed. Before, it was a mortal sin; afterwards, it wasn’t. So, the Church can change the gravity of a precept/rule, or even its definition in Cannon Law, over time.

This doesn’t make sense to me. How can God’s church create, modify, or remove certain activities beyond what God has commanded? If God is working through His church, and these Church rules/precepts are subject to change, how does this reconcile with the idea that God is unchangeable/unmoved? Truth is truth; it can’t change.

Because there is a difference between divine law and ecclesiastical law.

Divine law says we are to keep the Sabbath, or put another way, give God the regular worship owed him by setting aside a day for that worship. That’s non-negotiable.

HOW that is to be accomplished God has not defined. That has been left to the Church, and the Church has said that it should be Mass on Sundays. She could have also said Lauds, Mass and Vespers, or Vespers only, or a procession, or one Our Father and Three Hail Mary’s. These particulars are of ecclesiastical law, which gives the Church the power to dispense or modify as she sees fit. But in light of the divine law, the Church cannot eliminate some kind of obligation altogether.

Same is true for the hierarchy of the Church. Traditionally there are three major orders: subdeacon, deacon and priest, and the bishop is the fullness of the priesthood. However, it is recognized that only the bishop, priest and deacon are of divine origin. Despite being a major order, the Subdiaconate was of ecclesiastical origin. Pope Paul VI on his authority abolished it (bad idea, IMHO, but nonetheless). But as much as a Pope will try, he can never abolish the diaconate, priesthood or episcopate.

Eucharistic bread must be wheat. That is a divine precept and can never be changed. Whether it’s leavened or not is up to the particular church; that’s ecclesiastical law and can be changed, and in fact varies. Byzantines leaven their bread. Latins do not.

Penance is also another part of divine law: God has commanded us to do penance. He did not, however, tell us HOW to do it. The Church defined that by the no meat on Fridays law. That detail is of Church origin, and therefore can be adjusted or dispensed as needed. Perhaps the Church might institute Friday flogging instead, and she would be within her rights. But the Church cannot abolish penance altogether without violating the evangelical command.

Fasting before communion. Before, it used to be from midnight. Then it became three hours. Today, it’s one hour. But there is no divine command to fast before Communion; this is purely ecclesiastical. The Church can abolish it completely or increase it to 48 hours.

 

[AKDee]

I asked my priest about this during Lent, because I also had trouble with how the Church could say something was a mortal sin and then to say something wasn’t. But it was how I was viewing it that was wrong.

It came down to that it wasn’t ever a mortal sin to eat meat on Fridays (for example)- it was a mortal sin to not be obedient to the Church. So when the Church required abstinence on Fridays, to not be obedient to that was the mortal sin. When the Church relaxed that rule (for better or worse) one no longer was in a state of disobedience by eating meat on Friday, therefore no sin.

 

[Avila123]

I asked my priest about this during Lent, because I also had trouble with how the Church could say something was a mortal sin and then to say something wasn’t. But it was how I was viewing it that was wrong.

It came down to that it wasn’t ever a mortal sin to eat meat on Fridays (for example)- it was a mortal sin to not be obedient to the Church. So when the Church required abstinence on Fridays, to not be obedient to that was the mortal sin. When the Church relaxed that rule (for better or worse) one no longer was in a state of disobedience by eating meat on Friday, therefore no sin.

Not all of the Church has relaxed this rule. Over in the UK, we are still bound not to eat meat on Fridays (except if it is also a feast day). If, for any reason we eat meat (forgetfulness or insulting someone who innocently cooked you meat) then we can simply offer another penance. Personally, I just find it easier to keep every Friday meat free - unless it is Christmas Day.

 

[porthos11]

Not all of the Church has relaxed this rule. Over in the UK, we are still bound not to eat meat on Fridays (except if it is also a feast day). If, for any reason we eat meat (forgetfulness or insulting someone who innocently cooked you meat) then we can simply offer another penance. Personally, I just find it easier to keep every Friday meat free - unless it is Christmas Day.

Or any solemnity.

But this point does drive home the distinction. Eating meat on Friday is not a sin at all regardless of where you are, and this is what the OP needs to understand… The sin can lie in the disobedience of a duly promulgated law (i.e. “binding under pain of sin”). And the fact that the Friday penance is of ecclesiastical rather than divine origin is reinforced by the different practices around the world. In the UK, no meat every Friday of the year (an excellent discipline). AFAIK, U.S., no Friday meat in Lent only. Canada, meat is permitted every Friday, even inside of Lent (substitute penance).

The point is, where Friday penance is concerned, the Church has the power to relax or strengthen the rule.

 

[Avila123]

Or any solemnity.

But this point does drive home the distinction. Eating meat on Friday is not a sin at all regardless of where you are, and this is what the OP needs to understand… The sin can lie in the disobedience of a duly promulgated law (i.e. “binding under pain of sin”). And the fact that the Friday penance is of ecclesiastical rather than divine origin is reinforced by the different practices around the world. In the UK, no meat every Friday of the year (an excellent discipline). AFAIK, U.S., no Friday meat in Lent only. Canada, meat is permitted every Friday, even inside of Lent (substitute penance).

The point is, where Friday penance is concerned, the Church has the power to relax or strengthen the rule.

 

[AKDee]

Not all of the Church has relaxed this rule. Over in the UK, we are still bound not to eat meat on Fridays (except if it is also a feast day). If, for any reason we eat meat (forgetfulness or insulting someone who innocently cooked you meat) then we can simply offer another penance. Personally, I just find it easier to keep every Friday meat free - unless it is Christmas Day.

Friday in the U.S. remains a day of penance - some form of penance must be offered- but unfortunately this is a well kept secret in the U.S. Catholic Church and many people are unaware of it. Like you, I generally choose abstinence from meat as my penance, and if I forget then I offer up something else instead.

I think feast days are automatically exempt if they fall on a Friday.

 

[Phemie]

Friday in the U.S. remains a day of penance - some form of penance must be offered- **but unfortunately this is a well kept secret in the U.S. Catholic Church and many people are unaware of it. **Like you, I generally choose abstinence from meat as my penance, and if I forget then I offer up something else instead.

I think feast days are automatically exempt if they fall on a Friday.

Same as in Canada. I decided about a year ago that I would return to the practice of abstaining from meat on Fridays as the easiest way to obey the precept. It’s not always easy, particularly when those around your are eating great smelling meat dishes but considering what Jesus did for me I consider it a small sacrifice indeed.

If there is a reason to consume meat (hostess cooked it, for example) I will opt to abstain from alcohol instead. Not drinking a nice cold craft beer after a long week of work can be more of a sacrifice than not eating a burger.

 

[porthos11]

I think feast days are automatically exempt if they fall on a Friday.

Solemnities only. Feasts remain days of penance.

 

[AKDee]

Solemnities only. Feasts remain days of penance.

Ah. Thanks for the correction!

 

[Bran_Stark]

Perhaps the Church might institute Friday flogging instead, and she would be within her rights.

I’m having a lot of fun imagining what would happen if Pope Francis announced this tomorrow.

 

[porthos11]

I’m having a lot of fun imagining what would happen if Pope Francis announced this tomorrow.

Perhaps I exaggerate a bit though as flogging may also be considered objectively cruel (and therefore not within the Church’s rights). Unless the Church limits the Friday flogging to cotton towels and only one blow.

 

[paperwight66]

Not all of the Church has relaxed this rule. Over in the UK, we are still bound not to eat meat on Fridays (except if it is also a feast day). If, for any reason we eat meat (forgetfulness or insulting someone who innocently cooked you meat) then we can simply offer another penance. Personally, I just find it easier to keep every Friday meat free - unless it is Christmas Day.

Eating meat on Fridays is not a mortal sin in the UK. however. See the briefing notes issued at the time on the Catholic Bishops of England and Wales website. In the Q and A section it makes it clear that failure to abstain does not amount to a mortal sin.

 

[LiamQ]

This got me thinking about the old directive of not eating meat on Fridays, and how this changed. Before, it was a mortal sin; afterwards, it wasn’t. So, the Church can change the gravity of a precept/rule, or even its definition in Cannon Law, over time.

The grave matter was not in eating the meat but in the disobedience to a binding command of Christ’s Church. We are not free to simply disregard the Church’s law at our whim, because the Church has been given authority by Christ which it exercises in its mission to save souls.

The grave matter of disobedience continues to exist, even if the commands to which one is to be obedient have been greatly reduced, simplified, and made easier to follow.

Commands can change. The authority of the one commanding does not, and neither does the gravity of disobeying her.