Why is fish acceptable and meat not?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PuerCuriosus
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
What about the whole idea that it was done in the middle ages to prop up the fishing industry (which I assume is either false, or maybe eating only fish for lent was a tradition before the church approved it, some background would really help me). Anyway, I take it as a small t tradition and something that is a small sacrifice we can do.
 
In most parts of the world meats of land animals and foul are considered luxuries, while fish and related creatures is a more common–although not necessarily cheap or abundant–food source. Consider the fact that lobster was even considered peasant food on the East Coast of the US at one point.
This is exactly correct.

Before “the west” became very rich, it was indeed a luxury to be able to afford to purchase beef to eat, or to own a cow even (which could be slaughtered).

Being able to eat decent beef would have been a rare treat for most families.

I think as recently as my grandparents generation, when they were young (born in the 1920s), it was the norm for most people to only be able to afford to buy poorer cuts / offal etc to eat, or even meaty bones from slaughtered animals, to make soup from.

These days people feed their pet dogs with meaty bones or offal, not their loved ones.

All this just shows how lucky we are in the modern day.
 
Fasting on Fridays is terrific, but why is it okay for us to abstain from meat yet have fish? Is there any biblical reasoning to it?
The original Latin of Pope VI’s apostolic constitution Paenitemini- the word used for meat is carnis. In modern English meat can refer to any animal flesh.

BUT, in Latin it refers to mammals and birds ONLY- so fish, amphibians and insects except mammals and fowls are not. The vernacular was adopted.

John 6 is also a good reason to make a sacrifice. The church sees abstaining from meat as an inconvieniance, it makes you pause for a little sacrifice.

 
Fasting on Fridays is terrific, but why is it okay for us to abstain from meat yet have fish? Is there any biblical reasoning to it?
In the US, the only Friday you are required to fast is on Good Friday. HUGE difference between fasting and abstaining only from meat.
 
Fasting on Fridays is terrific, but why is it okay for us to abstain from meat yet have fish? Is there any biblical reasoning to it?
Where does it say you have to eat fish? I think it just says you have to abstain from meat. Fish is an option, but certainly not the only one.

Veggies come to mind.
 
What about the whole idea that it was done in the middle ages to prop up the fishing industry (which I assume is either false, or maybe eating only fish for lent was a tradition before the church approved it, some background would really help me). Anyway, I take it as a small t tradition and something that is a small sacrifice we can do.
Please see the link I provided. The story you mention above is an anti-Catholic myth.
 
Where does it say you have to eat fish? I think it just says you have to abstain from meat. Fish is an option, but certainly not the only one.

Veggies come to mind.
True, but not the question I was asking.
 
In most parts of the world meats of land animals and foul are considered luxuries, while fish and related creatures is a more common–although not necessarily cheap or abundant–food source. Consider the fact that lobster was even considered peasant food on the East Coast of the US at one point.
The last time I was in the US, Maine lobster was cheaper than beef. It has been for years. The last time I bought a lot of it was to make a lobster bisque for a large party. 99 Ranch, which is a large asian supermarket chain, was selling live Maine lobsters for about $4/pound.

One bit of trivia about eating fish during lent. It was once a practice of wealthy Christians to eat whale meat during lent, because it was seen to be a fish, yet tasted like meat. In fact, it was meat, the whales being mammals. But the people didn’t know that, at the time.
 
Coming from a midwestern meat and potatoes family, fish was a sacrifice! Especially when the fish was sardines 🙂 In my youth, we abstained from meat every Friday, not just during lent. I actually find this kind of nostalgic.

Until I grew up and got a bit more experience, I thought fish came in oblong frozen blocks called “perch” or “catfish”. These were transformed into smaller, thawed blocks that were breaded and fried. They did not taste like the ocean! It took me until my twenties to find that the blocks could actually be separated into filets, rinsed and blotted, taking away much of the fishy taste.

There was a reason they used to call us mackeral snappers!!! OK maybe TMI
 
This is interesting because near where I live there is a restaurant that serves fried turtle and they claim its acceptable for lent. I personally have not been to the restaurant nor do I eat turtle in lent or anytime for that matter:eek:
 
Red Lobster could have been like McDonald’s back then. 😉
A couple hundred years ago Lobster wasn’t fit for prisoners. I remember reading about a court case where serving lobster to prisoners was argued to be “cruel and unusual” punishment. It is just an enormous cockroach afterall, right?!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top