Why meat?

[ADiosgracias]

What is the meaning of abstaining from meat but fish is allowed?. What is the meaning of meat?

 

[mgsk]

From Dom Guéranger’s The Liturgical Year.
liturgialatina.org/lityear/lent/lent1.htm

During the two thousand and more years, which preceded the Deluge, men had no other food than the fruits of the earth, and these were only got by the toil of hard labour. But when God, as we have already observed, mercifully shortened man’s life, (that so he might have less time and power for sin), - he permitted him to eat the flesh of animals, as an additional nourishment in that state of deteriorated strength. It was then, also, that Noah, guided by a divine inspiration, extracted the juice of the grape, which thus formed a second stay for human debility.

Fasting, then, is the abstaining from such nourishments as these, which were permitted for the support of bodily strength. And firstly, it consisted in abstinence from flesh-meat, because it is a food that was given to man by God, out of condescension to his weakness, and not as one absolutely essential for the maintenance of life. Its privation, greater or less according to the regulations of the Church, is essential to the very notion of Fasting. Thus, whilst in many countries, the use of eggs, milk-meats, and even dripping and lard, is tolerated, - the abstaining from flesh-meat is everywhere maintained, as being essential to Fasting. For many centuries, eggs and milk-meats were not allowed, because they come under the class of animal food: even to this day, they are forbidden in the Eastern Churches, and are only allowed in the Latin Church by virtue of an annual dispensation. The precept of abstaining from flesh-meat is so essential to Lent, that even on Sundays, when the Fasting is interrupted, Abstinence is an obligation, binding even on those who are dispensed from the fasts of the week, unless there be a special dispensation granted for eating meat on the Sundays.

And as for fish:

Thus did the decay of piety, and the general deterioration of bodily strength among the people of the Western nations, infringe on the primitive observance of Fasting. To make our history of these humiliating changes anything like complete, we must mention one more relaxation. For several centuries, abstinence from flesh-meat included likewise the prohibition of every article of food that belonged to what is called the animal kingdom, with the single exception of Fish, which, on account of its cold nature, as also for several mystical reasons, founded on the Sacred Scriptures, was always permitted to be taken by those who fasted. Every sort of milk-meat was forbidden; and in Rome, even to this day, butter and cheese are not permitted during Lent, except on those days whereon permission to eat meat is granted.

Some fasting regulations have changed since then (and that’s a whole separate issue), but I like his explanation.

 

[utah_rose]

These are very good explanations, but wonder if it is truly a sacrifice in this day and age in parts of the U.S. and some other countries.

We know that in the south and California fresh seafood is readily available, so for those people (that like fish) its probably not a sacrifice at all. Furthermore, there are restaurants that specialize in gourmet fish dishes, so eating at one of these places wouldn’t be a sacrifice either.

On the other hand, if the Bishops let the people decide what to abstain from on Lenten Fridays, they probably wouldn’t abstain from anything.

Maybe if it was a little stricter (like absence of shell fish or cheese and eggs, it would be more of a sacrifice then meat.

I understand that the Greek Catholics and some others of the eastern faiths abstain from that also. That seems a lot more difficult.

 

[1ke]

John 6. Jesus tells us he will give up his flesh for the life of the world. He gave up his flesh on Friday. Therefore we abstain from flesh meats on Friday in penance and solidarity with Christ’s sacrifice.

 

[mgsk]

Furthermore, there are restaurants that specialize in gourmet fish dishes, so eating at one of these places wouldn’t be a sacrifice either.

Maybe if it was a little stricter (like absence of shell fish or cheese and eggs, it would be more of a sacrifice then meat.

You’re right. When we look at the current requirements from a broader perspective, they’re not strict at all. These dishes would have violated the fast for most of the history of the Church. Remember, during Lent all Catholics used to give up milk, butter, eggs, etc. too. Fasting also took place every day except Sundays - this wasn’t easy.

On the other hand, if the Bishops let the people decide what to abstain from on Lenten Fridays, they probably wouldn’t abstain from anything.

I agree with you. Look what has happened with the recent prescriptions. Despite people claiming that it is a more “grown up” approach, they’re almost universally ignored.

That seems a lot more difficult.

There are lots of us who still keep the traditional fast on a voluntary basis - it’s a great practice

 

[mgsk]

John 6. Jesus tells us he will give up his flesh for the life of the world. He gave up his flesh on Friday. Therefore we abstain from flesh meats on Friday in penance and solidarity with Christ’s sacrifice.

This is true too, but abstinence from meat wasn’t uniquely associated with Fridays until recently. Fridays probably always signified this connection, but that doesn’t really explain the older Lenten practices.

 

[andrewstx]

At the time the fast and abstinence rules were written meat was an exspensive and rare treat and fish was common and cheap.

Now the situation has reversed it’self. Meat is cheap while fish is exspensive, it is not penance to eat lobster or crab on Fridays.

Maybe it’s time for the rules to be changed.

 

[mgsk]

At the time the fast and abstinence rules were written meat was an exspensive and rare treat and fish was common and cheap.

I don’t know how accurate this narrative is. If it was so expensive and rare, why was it a penance to give it up one day per week (when, if this was true, you probably weren’t going to be eating it anyway)?

No, I think it’s more likely that people commonly used meat/bone broths, drippings, lard, etc. in a lot of their cooking and found creative ways to stretch their limited supply of meat as far as it would go. All of that would have been given up on Fridays too.

But you’re right. A strong argument can be made that having a seafood feast violates the spirit of Friday penance.