What do you plan to do during Lent?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ohana
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
mattkubes said:
Feel free to join in! There are plenty of us doing the traditional fast - this was one of the worst modifications to take place after Vatican II in my opinion.
Click to expand...
so many we should have our own group or thread. 😉

today’s my birthday. chocolate easter eggs and candy runneth over here at the office. someone brought in 2 boxes of doughnuts because it’s friday. I’m giving it all to Jesus.
 
mattkubes said:
Feel free to join in! There are plenty of us doing the traditional fast - this was one of the worst modifications to take place after Vatican II in my opinion.
Click to expand...
I feel like I’m missing something here. Are you guys doing a full fast for the 40 days Jesus-in-the-wilderness style?

Forgive me if I’m misunderstanding something…
 
dje101 said:
I feel like I’m missing something here. Are you guys doing a full fast for the 40 days Jesus-in-the-wilderness style?

Forgive me if I’m misunderstanding something…
Click to expand...
Well that’s what it helps us call to mind. Although the traditional fast is light compared to Our Lord’s, it’s not a walk in the park either. 40 is a number that has been symbolically associated with penance and anticipation (the Israelites in the desert for 40 years, Jesus in the desert for 40 days). So in anticipation of Easter, Catholics were historically asked to fast for the duration of Lent with partial or complete abstinence depending on the day. The important role that fasting plays in the development of faith and virtue has been, unfortunately, downplayed since the 60s…we went from 40 days of fasting down to 2. Popes have warned us not to grow lax in the observance of Lent in the past, but it seems like no one was listening to them over all the cries of “aggiornamento.” 🤷
 
dje101 said:
I feel like I’m missing something here. Are you guys doing a full fast for the 40 days Jesus-in-the-wilderness style?

Forgive me if I’m misunderstanding something…
Click to expand...
Easy hoss! Take it one step at a time.:rolleyes:
 
mattkubes said:
Well that’s what it helps us call to mind. Although the traditional fast is light compared to Our Lord’s, it’s not a walk in the park either. 40 is a number that has been symbolically associated with penance and anticipation (the Israelites in the desert for 40 years, Jesus in the desert for 40 days). So in anticipation of Easter, Catholics were historically asked to fast for the duration of Lent with partial or complete abstinence depending on the day. The important role that fasting plays in the development of faith and virtue has been, unfortunately, downplayed since the 60s…we went from 40 days of fasting down to 2. Popes have warned us not to grow lax in the observance of Lent in the past, but it seems like no one was listening to them over all the cries of “aggiornamento.” 🤷
Click to expand...
So you are abstaining from food for the whole 40 days?
 
dje101 said:
So you are abstaining from food for the whole 40 days?
Click to expand...
No, it’s the same as the Ash Wednesday “fast.” In the morning I have a piece of toast or a banana, something similar at lunch, and then a normal supper. That’s why I said the traditional fast is still light compared to Our Lord’s.
 
mattkubes said:
No, it’s the same as the Ash Wednesday “fast.” In the morning I have a piece of toast or a banana, something similar at lunch, and then a normal supper. That’s why I said the traditional fast is still light compared to Our Lord’s.
Click to expand...
Gotchya! I thought you meant traditional as in not eating. So it used to be that the church required you to do this fast for all of Lent?
 
I can’t tell you how many catholics tell me that the church has abolished Friday fasting. Haven’t got a clue.🤷
 
dje101 said:
Gotchya! I thought you meant traditional as in not eating. So it used to be that the church required you to do this fast for all of Lent?
Click to expand...
Yep, before the current (1983) Code of Canon Law.

There was actually a lot more than that too - take a look at the summary table here. Lots of people still observe the Ember Day fasts and Vigil fasts as well.
 
wcknight said:
I hope to pray a little more and play a little less. I will NOT hate the Duke sports teams quite as much as I usually do. I promise not to swear at them when I go down to the ACC tournament (the womens tourn) next week, at least not as much as I usually do.

We beat them this past Sunday, and it was such a sweet victory !!! Go TERPS !!

I plan to be a bit more kind and loving and forgiving, BUT when it comes to Duke, I know it may be nearly impossible. There’s a reason they’re called ‘blue’ DEVILS… spawn of SATAN comes to mind…
Click to expand...
Spawn of Satan? Try to hold back a little! LOL 🙂
 
dailey said:
What to you mean?
Click to expand...
It is my understanding that the “New Order” of things no longer requires meatless Fridays however, it requires (?) a substitute if you wish to eat meat! I haven’t read the language for some time but that’s what I got out of it. My wife and I didn’t buy into it…we never understood why they wanted to change it and we never changed.
 
Silver_Thread said:
It is my understanding that the “New Order” of things no longer requires meatless Fridays however, it requires (?) a substitute if you wish to eat meat! I haven’t read the language for some time but that’s what I got out of it. My wife and I didn’t buy into it…we never understood why they wanted to change it and we never changed.
Click to expand...
I think that poster asked because you originally said “fasting” - as you know, it’s actually abstinence that was made optional in some areas. I’m not sure when fasting was last required on Fridays, but it was quite a while ago. Still, that would be an even better practice to revive, and I agree with your sentiment.

And you’re right, the vague wording makes even the substitute penance optional in the US. See a more in depth analysis here.

A sad state of affairs…
 
I think the Church still encourages fasting as a penitential act. It is something many Catholics continue to do, but the fast may be one day of bread and water a week, or fasting from a favorite activity etc. We do this in some ways whenever we “offer up” some act or deprivation we freely choose. As Martha Stewart says, “Its a good thing”. And doesn’t it have more metit if we just do it rather than obeying an order to do it. The Church has taught for a long time that these things are acts to be cultivated. Maybe Mother Church is just letting us be adult Catholics.
 
Well maybe the church needs to get out the message, because that ain’t a happenin! But hey…maybe they’ll listen to Martha Stewart and Julian Norwich.
 
Ohana said:
I think the Church still encourages fasting as a penitential act. It is something many Catholics continue to do, but the fast may be one day of bread and water a week, or fasting from a favorite activity etc. We do this in some ways whenever we “offer up” some act or deprivation we freely choose. As Martha Stewart says, “Its a good thing”. And doesn’t it have more metit if we just do it rather than obeying an order to do it. The Church has taught for a long time that these things are acts to be cultivated. Maybe Mother Church is just letting us be adult Catholics.
Click to expand...
Yes, the encouragement is there - albeit on dusty documents that are rarely mentioned by any modern priests of bishops. Also, giving up a favourite activity really isn’t a fast. It could certainly count as a penance, and it would be praiseworthy, but to describe it as a “fast” is a break with centuries’ old Church language and teaching.

I’ve heard it said that these acts have more merit if we do them voluntarily, and that might be the case, but the lived experience of the Church since mandatory fasting was effectively abolished shows that people just won’t do it. Fasting, even two days in Lent, has turned into a chore that is quite often ignored.

And I’m not accusing you of this, but I think to assert that this practice is more adult comes off as quite arrogant. Some of the most brilliant popes and some of the greatest saints the Church has ever produced couldn’t talk enough about the importance of fasting during the time when the traditional (childish?) laws were in place. What are the odds that an innovation - and a clear break with tradition - in the 1960s would turn out to be more successful?
 
mattkubes said:
I think that poster asked because you originally said “fasting” - as you know, it’s actually abstinence that was made optional in some areas. I’m not sure when fasting was last required on Fridays, but it was quite a while ago. Still, that would be an even better practice to revive, and I agree with your sentiment.

And you’re right, the vague wording makes even the substitute penance optional in the US. See a more in depth analysis here.

A sad state of affairs…
Click to expand...
Yes, I got confused with the word “fasting”. Thanks to you both for clarifying! 🙂
 
I wasn’t referring to the practice as adult, rather that we take adult responsibility for deciding to fast and abstain during but even outside of Lent. I had a friend who used to fast from water, a practice I am unsure of for health reasons. Nevertheless, she felt it important to fast or abstain in some what more often than “required”. The “required” is really a teaching tool I think, to inform us of how to go about such things and more importantly, why. We can then choose to do other things, all for the greater Glory of God, or in reparation for our sins, etc.

Sorry if I was unclear - I do that more than I would like.:):o
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top