I need a catholic to explain this to me....

[lifesaver]

So since its St. Patty's day, all the bishops are giving dispensation so peeps can eat corned beef on the holiday. I can especially understand how important that is in South Texas where I have actually met BOTH Irish people here. But that is besides the point.

I thought the rule was (dispensations aside) that Catholics couldnt eat BEEF on Fridays during lent or ash wednesday. I guess that belief was perpetuated because all the restauraunts here advertise fish dinners on Fridays during Lent. Fish is a meet, so whats up? What are the rules? I know about the under 14 / over 60 exemption, but still? Fish/No Fish? Whats up with Chicken? Go or no go?

[AGDee]

No meat to the Catholics means no beef, chicken, pork, lamb. If it lives on land, you don't eat it, if it lives in water, you can eat it.
The whole point is supposed to be sacrifice. I laughed to myself when someone at work was complaining in Ash Wednesday that there was no fish available for lunch. I suggested that she have grilled cheese and she said "I was looking forward to fish", which is totally against the whole point of having a "fast" day.

The "Saints" days are considered feast days, so there is a conflict when it happens on a fasting day during Lent. That's why the dispensations were issued.

[AlphaFrog]

In the case of St. Patrick's Day, usually the dispensation comes with a "Pick another day that week and don't eat meat". It's not about what "counts as meat" and what doesn't, it about sacrifice (and rememberance of sacrafice). It's also not a "you'll burn in hell if you don't do it" kind of thing. Let's say it's a Friday in Lent, and you completely forgot and you're halfway through your hamburger - from what my religion teachers taught me in Catholics school (I'm Luthern, but I halfway payed attention) the "church" would rather you finished your hamburger and picked another day to go without meat, then to throw it away and be wasteful.

[SydneyK]

Not trying to be dense (or confrontational, either), but I don't get it. Obviously, I'm not Catholic, so ultimately it doesn't really affect me. But, I'm curious nonetheless.

Is this "rule" based on a particular scripture, or is it just the way Catholics choose to make sacrifices?

Is St. Patty's Day a Catholic holiday of sorts? AGDee mentioned that the dispensation came about because "Saints" days are feast days (which conflicts with a fasting day). Now, maybe it's just me, but it seems like the sacrifices Catholics are expected to make on fasting days are more... important, if you will... than feasting days (but again, I have no idea - this is all just my opinion). Why would the Catholic Church side with the feast day, when it seems they should do just the opposite?

Also, if "rules" can be changed so easily, doesn't it kinda defeat the point of having them? I mean, they were implemented for a reason, right? If the rules are based on scripture, shouldn't the exceptions be, too?

Again, I'm not trying to be difficult - I'm just curious! This Baptist is having a hard time wrapping her mind around Catholicism!

[AlphaFrog]

Trust me, it's confusing when you first start learning about it!!!

The fasting during Lent is more of a church tradition then scripturally based, athough fasting is discussed in the Bible.

As for "feast" days, these are also church tradtions, and are in honor of a particular Saint (in this case, St. Patrick, but there are dozens of feast days). The feast days don't really "override" the fasting, but rather, as I mentioned, the fast day is typically moved to another day for that week (usually Saturday). It's not that either one is more importaint then the other, but St. Pat's is a spesifc day (Saints days are USUALLY based on either the day of their death or birth, but I believe they try to avoid days that are already "taken" by other saints), whereas Fridays were picked because of Good Friday, but really could have just as easily been any day of the week.

And the point of having "rules" isn't that they are hard and fast and if you don't follow them then you're a horrible Christian who will burn, but they are something you should do for yourself to strengthen your own faith. If you're going to not eat meat grudgingly, then you might as well not do it at all, because you're missing the point. The point is for you to willing give up something to grow in your faith, not because you HAVE to.

I am a Luthern and I could never be Catholic for certain reasons, but I am open to learning about different religions, and I'm glad I got to spend time in Catholic school.

[leesek]

I have been having this arguement with my family and friends for years. I am Methodist but have attended the Catholic Church with my hubby and kids for the past 20 + years. It seems to me that to go to a nice resturant or the local Knight's of Colombus Hall and have a "feast" of fish with all the fixin's including beer and wine totally defeats the purpose of sacrifice. If it is something that you enjoy doing and it has actually turned into a party (which is often the case), it is not a sacrifice!!!

I'm not putting down the tradition, I've just never understood the "logic".

[MysticCat]

Originally posted by SydneyK
Not trying to be dense (or confrontational, either), but I don't get it. Obviously, I'm not Catholic, so ultimately it doesn't really affect me. But, I'm curious nonetheless.

Is this "rule" based on a particular scripture, or is it just the way Catholics choose to make sacrifices?

To add a little to what AlphaFrog said, fasting or abstinence (giving up meat or some other foods) during Lent is not a scriptural mandate, it is a church discipline. Indeed, observance of Lent, while very ancient, is not a scriptural mandate either, although the 40 days are modeled after Christ's 40 days in the wilderness.

Lent originally arose as a time for new converts who were being educated in the faith to prepare for their baptisms, which would take place on Easter. It was also a time for those who had become estranged from the church or excommunicated to seek reconciliation with the church. From these roots, it developed into a time for all Christians to engage in penitential disciplines as a way of preparing for Easter.

Note that if you check a calendar and count from Ash Wednesday to Holy Saturday (the day between Good Friday and Easter), you will get 46 days, not 40. That is because Sundays are not counted. Since at least the fourth century, it has been considered innappropriate to fast on Sundays, since each Sunday is a festival of the resurrection, or a "Little Easter." The same kind of reasoning can apply to other festivals and feasts that might occur during Lent.

As for Fridays, at the time of the early church, pious Jews fasted or abstained from certain foods on two days each week -- Tuesdays and Thursdays (unless a festival fell on one of these days). The church kept this tradition but moved the days to Wednesday and Friday, partly to distinguish their practice from the Jewish practice and partly as a rememberence of Good Friday (making every Friday a "Little Good Friday" just as every Sunday is a "Little Easter"). Eventually, only the Friday abstinence was observed. Since the Second Vatican Council, the Friday abstinence, while recommended throughout the year, is only obligatory during Lent.

Is St. Patty's Day a Catholic holiday of sorts? AGDee mentioned that the dispensation came about because "Saints" days are feast days (which conflicts with a fasting day). Now, maybe it's just me, but it seems like the sacrifices Catholics are expected to make on fasting days are more... important, if you will... than feasting days (but again, I have no idea - this is all just my opinion). Why would the Catholic Church side with the feast day, when it seems they should do just the opposite?

St. Patrick's Day is a feast day, especially for Irish Catholics and Catholics in dioceses where St. Patrick is the patron saint, such as New York. (And BTW, it's St. Paddy, not Patty. .) But "feast" here is being used in its original sense -- a religious festival commemorating an event or honoring God or a saint. The root of "feast" is the same as the root of "festival." Big, festive meals came to be called "feasts" because they occurred on "feast days."

Since early days, the church has commemorated saints and matyrs. Typically, and if known, the feast occurs on the day the saint or martyr died.

Also, if "rules" can be changed so easily, doesn't it kinda defeat the point of having them? I mean, they were implemented for a reason, right? If the rules are based on scripture, shouldn't the exceptions be, too?

The rules on fasting and abstinence during Lent are not meant to be hard and unbending or types of punishment -- they are spiritual disciplines designed to help people renew their faith and prepare to enter completely into the mystery and celebration of Easter. Given that, some flexibility is not only permissible but probably desirable. Otherwise, legalism rather than the spirit of penitence wins out.

[GeekyPenguin]

Originally posted by leesek
I have been having this arguement with my family and friends for years. I am Methodist but have attended the Catholic Church with my hubby and kids for the past 20 + years. It seems to me that to go to a nice resturant or the local Knight's of Colombus Hall and have a "feast" of fish with all the fixin's including beer and wine totally defeats the purpose of sacrifice. If it is something that you enjoy doing and it has actually turned into a party (which is often the case), it is not a sacrifice!!!

I'm not putting down the tradition, I've just never understood the "logic".

In theory, that is your only large meal that day - you are not supposed to be starving yourself entirely on Ash Wed. and Fridays, but instead eating smaller meals.

And there actually is somewhat of a scriptural basis to Lent - 40 days and nights ring a bell, anyone? We're supposed to be making small sacrifices and improving ourselves, while remembering the large sacrifice that Christ made for us.

Also - Lutheran. With an A.

Also - it really couldn't have been any other day of the week - GOOD FRIDAY is Good Friday for a reason, and that's why we use Fridays.

And a final point - all of my Lutheran friends (from 3 different denominations) observe Lent to varying different degrees.

I just saw that MysticCat posted so I am going to shut up and prepare myself for an evening of consuming green beer with the Conservinator, who better not try to wear an orange shirt again this year.

[RedRoseSAI]

Interesting - in my almost 30 years as a Catholic (which included 6 years of Catholic school), I always thought it was just cow that was forbidden. Guess I'm going to hell.

[MysticCat]

Originally posted by leesek
I have been having this arguement with my family and friends for years. I am Methodist but have attended the Catholic Church with my hubby and kids for the past 20 + years. It seems to me that to go to a nice resturant or the local Knight's of Colombus Hall and have a "feast" of fish with all the fixin's including beer and wine totally defeats the purpose of sacrifice. If it is something that you enjoy doing and it has actually turned into a party (which is often the case), it is not a sacrifice!!!

I remember the time in college I was singing in the choir of an Episcopal church. On Good Friday, the church provided a lunch for those who were attending any part of the 3-hours service. Following the "rule of no meat," the centerpiece of lunch was lobster bisque. Kind of missed the point by a mile, I thought.

I agree with you, and think that's where the legalism ("we're observing the rule") seems to win out over the underlying spirit. We have a Catholic church nearby that has the "feast of fish" you describe. Another nearby Catholic church has a simple, vegetarian supper every Friday during Lent, which is followed by Stations of the Cross. I think that's much more in keeping with the spirit of the Lenten disciplines.

[33girl]

Originally posted by GeekyPenguin
I just saw that MysticCat posted so I am going to shut up and prepare myself for an evening of consuming green beer with the Conservinator, who better not try to wear an orange shirt again this year.

Last Sat. when we were having the parade here, one of the bartenders had an orange shirt on. I asked if he was Protestant or if it was just a coincidence. He said he's actually Jewish but sympathetic to Northern Ireland - and also that I was the first person who got it. I thought everyone knew about that.

[MysticCat]

Originally posted by GeekyPenguin
I just saw that MysticCat posted so I am going to shut up and prepare myself for an evening of consuming green beer with the Conservinator, who better not try to wear an orange shirt again this year.

Very impressed!! Most people haven't got a clue about orange on St. Patrick's Day. And of course, the Ian Paisleys and Orange Orders have taken what was once a fairly innocuous symbol and turned it into something of an embarrassment.

I try to compromise by wearing something green with my orange, but because of the embarrasment already noted, my orange tends to get a little smaller every year.

And yes, as you noted, it's not just Catholics who observe Lent. We Presbyterians, Episcopalians/Anglicans, Lutherans, and many others do as well, though perhaps not in all the same ways as Catholics. And our Greek GreekChatters could, I'm sure, tell us how the disciplines of Eastern Orthodoxy for Great Lent make all of the disciplines of the rest of us pale in comparison.

[AlphaFrog]

<-Not a good speller, I know.


My grandmother was "orange" Irish. But I don't own anything orange to wear, so I wore my green Notre Dame HS Irish softball longsleeve Tshirt.

[MysticCat]

Originally posted by 33girl
I thought everyone knew about that.

Nope. My family is Ulster Scots -- Scots who came to America by way of Ulster/Northern Ireland. (And please, we [i]don't[i] say "Scotch-Irish," since people aren't "Scotch" and we sort of kept to ourselves, never really intermarrying much with the real Irish.)

For the benefit of others who may not know, green is the traditional color of Catholics in Ireland (and of Irish people in general), while orange is the traditional color of Protestants in Ireland, most of whom came from Scotland. The use of orange came from the Protestant Prince William of Orange (of William and Mary fame -- he was Dutch, and orange is still the national color of The Netherlands. That's why in the Olympics, Dutch athletes always wear orange.) This the origin of the colors of the Irish flag -- the Green is for the Catholics, the Orange for the Protestants and the white for the peace and unity between them. (Would that it were so.)

In all the years I've worn orange on St. Patricks Day, no one (outside family and a few other Ulster-Scot type friends) has ever caught on, other than to say "where's your green?" But as I said earlier, it getting to the point where it's almost embarrasing to claim orange.

Still, it's heartening to see how many people here know about the orange-thing. Just proves again the superior knowledge of GreekChatters.

[SydneyK]

This is so interesting.

I've never heard of the orange thing. Coincidently, I'm donning orange today.

Thanks so much everyone for enlightening me! I knew I should've taken that religion class while I was still in school!