Keeping regular days of abstinence from meat, especially on Fridays, has been practiced and enforced by the Church from the very beginning. It is so essential for the life of the Church because of its many benefits: it is an act of penance in communion with all of the faithful; it reminds us of the flesh of Christ sacrificed for us; and it helps us to prepare ourselves for the celebration of His resurrection every Sunday.
Abstinence on all Fridays has been mandatory throughout most of Church history. About 50 years ago, however, the Second Vatican Council made it so that this obligation is no longer a universal requirement for the entire Church, except during Lent. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has likewise not imposed the requirement since that time, so year-round abstinence on Fridays is generally not practiced by American Catholics. (But, being Wisconsinites, we still participate in the age-old tradition of gorging ourselves with sumptuous fried fish every Friday night as if it were.)
But even though it is not a requirement, there are some very good reasons for abstaining from meat on all Fridays of the year.
- Friday should remain a day of penance. After the Second Vatican Council, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) issued a pastoral letter that made clear the continued importance of acts of penance on every Friday, and a preference for abstinence from meat in the performance of that penance. Paragraph 24 reads: "Among the works of voluntary self-denial and personal penance which we especially commend to our people for the future observance of Friday, even though we hereby terminate the traditional law of abstinence binding under pain of sin, as the sole prescribed means of observing Friday, we give first place to abstinence from flesh meat. We do so in the hope that the Catholic community will ordinarily continue to abstain from meat by free choice as formerly we did in obedience to Church law."
- We are called on to abstain as an act of penance for the cause of peace on Earth. Since 1983, the American Catholic bishops have been abstaining from meat every Friday for this purpose, and they encourage the American faithful to do likewise. This practice was first declared in paragraph 298 of the Conference's pastoral letter The Challenge of Peace.
- The USCCB is currently reflecting on whether to reinstate the obligation of year-round Friday abstinence. Why not beat them to it, as a sign of our particular commitment to penance?
- Abstinence from industrial meat is an act of environmental and social justice. With its terribly excessive use of energy, land, feed and water, not to mention its horrendous generation of animal waste, it is one of the most unsustainable industries we can partake in. Typically, its treatment of livestock is inhumane and uncharitable. Its laborers are often undocumented and work under undignified conditions. Year-round Friday abstinence is a concrete step towards escaping our dependence on this unjust and ultimately inefficient system.
- It's good for you. Apart from being environmentally and socially disastrous, the effects of industrialized meat production in the United States are also nutritionally disastrous. By ignoring and defying the natural processes by which its livestock ought to live — pumping them with growth hormones and antibiotics and enclosing them in cramped and filthy quarters — the industry jeopardizes the health of those who consume its product. While there is certainly more sustainable and healthy non-industrial meat that is available, it is also the medical consensus that Americans consume meat in general, particularly red meat, much more frequently than they ought to.
- It is a great witness to the faith. Promoters of worldwide campaigns like Meatless Monday usually don't consider that Christians have been abstaining from meat once every week way before it was cool. Sometimes the best way to evangelize is to more fully embrace the rich tradition of our faith.
We should be clear about one notion that is not a reason to abstain from meat: the idea that eating meat is intrinsically evil. God sanctions all of His creatures for human consumption when he tells St. Peter to "kill and eat" (Acts 10:9-15). Further, St. Paul says in 1 Timothy 4:1-5:
"Now the Spirit explicitly says that in the last times some will turn away from the faith by paying attention to deceitful spirits and demonic instructions. They forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected when received with thanksgiving, through the hypocrisy of liars with branded consciences, for it is made holy by the invocation of God in prayer."
So, eating meat is no more intrinsically evil than marriage is. Yet, just as some are called to a life of celibacy, so some might be called to a life of vegetarianism. As we already discussed on this blog, it was the theological opinion of St. Thomas Aquinas that humans did not eat meat before the Fall. While eating meat is not intrinsically sinful, vegetarianism may be a heroic act to conform one's life to the harmony enjoyed in the state of innocence.
In any case, we recommend year-round Friday abstinence as a new group resolution, continuing this week where we left off on Good Friday. What do y'all think?
Kevin, this is an absolutely stupendous post. Thanks for the thoughtful writing. I really like the idea of Meatless Fridays.
ReplyDeleteThis is awesome - I'm in! As the wildlife/animal liaison, I approve of this post. Touche Kevin, Touche. Question, are we going to include fish in the "meat" category? I know we eat fish on Friday's during Lent but many of the world's fisheries are collapsing and also a lot of the fish we would buy around here are unsustainable. Could we choose to include fish in our weekly meat fast? We can discuss it but I think that it would be a good idea. Also, I would like to set a date for the sustainable seafood dinner and showing of "Sharkwater" soon! We can discuss it tomorrow morning - can't wait!
ReplyDeletehttp://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2012/04/05/150061991/lust-lies-and-empire-the-fishy-tale-behind-eating-fish-on-friday
DeleteHere's a follow-up on the point Tyler brought up on Wednesday. It doesn't look like we can write off the Church's distinction between mammals and fish as a corrupt nod to the medieval fishing industry. The teaching actually makes sense in a worldview (like the Aristotelian one, as Buck brought up) where there's a real ontological distinction between "mammal-ness" and "fish-ness." It has long been the understanding of the Church that "flesh" includes mammal and bird meat but not reptile, fish, or shellfish meat. Even through the lens of modern biology, it makes sense. The former group are classified as warm-blooded, and the latter group as cold-blooded.
At the same time, this article also tells the story of how over a thousand years of Christendom's abstinence from meat has contributed to the depletion of fisheries. This is clearly not in the spirit of abstinence's purpose. To counteract these affects, and maybe even as a sign of penance for the ecological abuse that the Church's abstinence from meat throughout history has contributed to, I personally think it would be a good idea for us to abstain from fish and seafood in addition to meat. This is something we can discuss and decide on Wednesday.
The article also mentions that Wednesdays and Saturdays have also been practiced as days of abstinence at times throughout Church history, as well as all of the days of Lent and Advent. This might be another possibility for us to look into and discuss.
http://newtheologicalmovement.blogspot.com/2012/03/why-do-catholics-abstain-from-meat.html
This article mentions that the requirement for abstinence has in the past included eggs, dairy, and shellfish. I don't think that would be a bad idea to look into, either.
This sounds like a great idea, Kevin!
ReplyDeleteI'd like to add a couple of verses for us to consider in discussion:
1. "If an unbeliever invites you and you want to go, eat whatever is placed before you, without raising questions on grounds of conscience." - 1 Corinthians 10:27 I think Paul is talking about accepting charity - when someone goes out of their way to provide us with food, we don't want to make a fuss out of rejecting it. For example, if we went home for the weekend and our parents made steak, we wouldn't want to refuse it.
2. "Therefore if food causes my brother to sin, I will never eat meat again, so that I may not cause my brother to sin." -1 Corinthians 8:13 This makes me think of how our own purchases of meat indirectly cause the environmental degradation Kevin is talking about.We may not be the ones directly dumping manure in rivers or clearing land, but we are causing our brothers to do so. Paul is saying we should go out of our way to prevent our brothers from sinning - or creating environmental destruction - but he does not say it is a sin if we don't.
Great verses! They add a lot to the discussion.
DeleteI think that in the context of 1 Corinthians 10, Paul is talking specifically about meat sacrificed to idols. Throughout the letter he's answering a lot of questions on that topic because, apparently, a lot of Corinthians are worried that meat that is the product of pagan worship might be impure for Christians to eat. Paul basically tells them that nothing is impure for Christians to eat, "for the earth and its fullness are the Lord's" (v. 26), and so we should not worry about whether meat had been sacrificed to an idol or not. I think Paul's teaching in this example has a modern analog. He's saying that we should accept the charity of another, even if the production of the meat was immoral. In the same way, today, we shouldn't let a situation like that weigh on our consciences because the animal is already dead and no meat is "impure" in a moral sense. Therefore, it's best to eat and to not offend; it's just not a big deal.
But while Paul is talking about the purity of the food, I think abstinence for the sake of penance is a different matter. We abstain not because the food is impure, but because we are making a personal sacrifice for spiritual gain. I think that this abstinence should be seen as a resolution before God and our community which, like a Lenten resolution, should be broken only for good reason — and the acceptability of the reason ought to be a matter of personal conscience, but support from and accountability to the community may be a good idea, too. To avoid situations like the one you presented, it may be best to let people know about your commitment to abstaining from meat on Fridays ahead of time.
Then there is the question of breaking abstinence on a Friday during Lent. In that case, it has to be taken into account that it is a matter of Canon Law, so you are not only accountable to your personal conscience and this community, but also to the entire Church. All of our resolutions and actions are ultimately done for God, but we are accountable for them to different parties according to the nature of the resolution. I'm suggesting that Vita Pura's resolutions, not being matters of Canon Law, bind us to our personal consciences and to this community, but not to the entire Church. If it were a Friday during Lent, though, I think we would be bound to the entire Church. And the Church drives a pretty tough bargain when it comes to what is actually an acceptable reason to break the law of abstinence. It would be best to talk to your confessor, since he represents the Church.
Thanks for the post, Kevin! Very interesting, as I have gradually given up meat in the past year. After reading this, I feel that abstinence from meat can be most fully justified from a faith perspective - it truly does remind us of all that Christ sacrificed for us. It's so humbling that we do something as little as giving up meat, while Christ gave up His life - His own flesh - so that we may be saved.
ReplyDeleteI particularly like the first verse, Emily, since often I have found that nonreligious vegetarians/vegans have a harder time understanding why someone who doesn't eat meat would freely do so in certain circumstances. It is important that we are grateful for what we have, including what is given to us.
Looking forward to discussion tomorrow!
Here is the link to the In-Vitro Meat article I mentioned today.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2013/jan/05/the-future-of-food