Talk:Fasting and abstinence in the Catholic Church

older entries
Cut and removed this table from the traditional days section. Rewrote and summarized as an example of one implementation of the "traditional" times of penance. Anyone have a reference that gives a time frame when this was actually the rule? Gimmetrow 18:28, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

That's according to the 1917 Code of Canon Law, although there's a few errors. Partial abstinence is on Ember Wednesdays and Saturdays only, while the fast on vigils was not anticipated (Canon 1252, "nor is the Vigil anticipated"). All Vigils except Christmas and Epiphany, until the 1955 reforms, were anticipated liturgically on the previous Saturday if they fell on Sunday, but the fast was not. It could have been before 1917, but I don't know the prior rules. PaulGS 04:20, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, the Vigils were anticipated on Sat under the decretal (before 1917 Code), which is why the code explicitly metnions that they are [i.e., no longer] anticipated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.33.129.135 (talk) 03:06, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Fasting

 * Every day of Lent, from Ash Wednesday through Good Friday, excluding Sundays
 * Holy Saturday until noon
 * The twelve Ember Days
 * The vigil of Pentecost
 * October 31, the vigil of All Saints. If this be a Sunday, the fast is transferred to Saturday, October 30.
 * December 24, the vigil of Christmas, unless this was Sunday.
 * December 7, the vigil of the Immaculate Conception. If this was a Sunday, the fast was transferred to Saturday, December 6.

Complete abstinence

 * Every Friday, unless it be a holy day of obligation
 * Ash Wednesday
 * Holy Saturday until noon
 * December 24 (vigil of Christmas)
 * December 7 (vigil of Immaculate Conception; transferred to December 6 if the 7th should was a Sunday)

Partial abstinence

 * Ember Wednesdays and Saturdays
 * The vigil of Pentecost
 * The vigil of All Saints October 31; transferred to October 30 if the 31st should be a Sunday

Also cut this, which doesn't appear to correspond to any law at any time. Gimmetrow 18:28, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

The following are the modern days of fasting and abstinence in the church.
 * Ash Wednesday (fast & abstinence)
 * Every Friday of Lent (abstinence)
 * Good Friday (fast & abstinence)
 * Holy Saturday (fast & abstinence until noon)
 * December 24 (Christmas Eve) (abstinence - no longer followed in the western world).

Needs correction:

“All Fridays of the year are days are bound by the law of abstinence on all Fridays that are not Solemnities, while the law of fasting binds all Catholics who are aged between eighteen and sixty on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday.” Ddccss (talk) 12:18, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Pope "Fish Story"
Is it worth mentioning the "fish story" one often hears about fish being allowed for economic reasons, that the fish markets put pressure upon the Pope (the story never really specifies which Pope...) to make that exception? Personally, I've always seen it as hogwash. Given the longer periods of fasting and abstinence that used to be required, removing all protein was potentially harmful and the more exotic methods that avoided meat (oils and the like) were available only to the rich. Fish was chosen because a) they're cold-blooded creatures and b) fish was readily available to anyone with a net versus red meat and poultry which was often more restricted to the rich (old-style poaching laws and all). Every Lent, I have someone telling me that they "heard somewhere" the market pressure version and it would be nice to have a place to point them. -Fuzzy (talk) 16:16, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Duck
Is it true that Catholics were allowed to eat the breast of a duck on Fridays etc.? The reasoning being that the lower part of the duck spent much of its time in water and so could be classified as fish. Its something I heard a long time ago, but it may be apocryphal. Myrvin (talk) 12:51, 8 July 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure, but people did certainly consider the "fish-like" aquatic mammals such as seals to be fish. There were some stranger exception such as beavers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beaver#In_dietary_law) and capybara (no source) but it makes some sense if you've got obviously mammalian creatures excluded from the fasting rule. I think you'll find there is no church ruling on most of it because no one bothered asking them and they didn't strongly object. Nitwit005 (talk) 04:41, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

There is no historical basis to say portions of an animals were exempt because they happened to eb in water, though some aniimals were considered permissible in some locales but not in others. This is not because no one cared to ask but because laws of fast and abstinence were based first on custom and seconardily on diocesan decrees. In 1917 the regulations became much more central, which they had tended toward since the time of Trent, anyway, with Roman Congregations settling legal questions the world over in every aspect of Church life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.33.129.135 (talk) 03:13, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

United States
There is an unsourced comment "The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops is proposing in the very near future to re-introduce the required abstinence from meat on every Friday of the year, along with fasting and abstinence on Ash Wednesday, Good Friday, the Fridays of Lent, the Ember Days, the Rogation Days, the Fridays and Saturdays of Advent, and the vigils observed on the Saturday before Pentecost, August 14 (the vigil of the Assumption, October 31 (the vigil of All Saints), December 7 (the vigil of the Immaculate Conception, and December 24 (Christmas Eve).[citation needed]"

Does anyone know if this is true? If so, where did you hear it? To be completely honest, I think that would be a very excessive number of days of fast and abstinence. With people leaving the church, it seems unlikely that they'd want to introduce a significant burden. Ember and Rogation Days are especially surprising, since they aren't even observed in our current calendar. Also, I've never heard of Saturdays during Advent ever being a day of fast or abstinence at any time in the past. Christmas Eve is also surprising. I realize that was a day of fast in the past, but nowadays, it's a big day for celebration and a big meal. 68.193.17.157 (talk) 03:42, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
 * This whole section seems to be mostly uncited or a strange reading of what the references actually say. I have removed the speculative, uncited part mentioned above, and I am trying to rewrite the rest to follow what the references say. Myrvin (talk) 13:56, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Summary
The Summary at the top of this page strikes me as particularly bad. It goes into detail about what it is assumed the Personal Ordinariate of the Chair of St Peter is going to do (with no reference to the P/O of Our Lady of Walsingham), which seems out of place, in the summary at least. It also says the "pre-vatican II practice of abstaining from meat on fridays" which is odd given that the article goes on to give details that both in the England&Wales and US Bishops' Conferences this is the current practice (and my own experience, but of course that doesn't count). I got this impression after reading the Summary, and I've only glanced over the rest of the article, but even that looks like it could do with some restructuring. I don't really know where to start or what structure to propose, but I wanted to flag this article for some serious work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.111.129.114 (talk) 00:23, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Fasting and abstinence in the Roman Catholic Church. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090930112945/http://www.chowdc.org:80/Papers/Saunders%202001.html to http://www.chowdc.org/Papers/Saunders%202001.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 04:27, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Fasting and abstinence in the Catholic Church. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111115004422/http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P4O.HTM to http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P4O.HTM
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060429165754/http://www.vatican.va:80/holy_father/paul_vi/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_p-vi_apc_19660217_paenitemini_en.html to http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/apost_constitutions/documents/hf_p-vi_apc_19660217_paenitemini_en.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:52, 30 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Fasting and abstinence in the Catholic Church. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141102050156/https://www.stthomas.edu/mcdc/topics/fasting/ to https://www.stthomas.edu/mcdc/topics/fasting/
 * Added tag to http://www.catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/1401103.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060621164207/http://www.wf-f.org/FastandAbstinence.html to http://www.wf-f.org/FastandAbstinence.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:57, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

This article should be re-titled
This article reads in part like an explanation of Catholic practice over the last couple of decades, and in part like a sad attempt to discuss eastern practice in 3 sentences.

As written, this article should be titled "Fasting and Abstinence in the Catholic Church since the 1980s, with funny stories from Sunday School and vague references to counter-Reformation re-interpretations of ancient practice".

A better idea would be to re-title this "Fasting and Abstinence in the Christian Church" and include headings on "Antiquity to 1000", "Medieval Western Practice", "The Reformation and Counter-Reformation", "The Catholic Church in the 20th Century", and then sections on Eastern practice. Eastern practices would have to divided between the Greek-Slavic groups, the Arabs, and the Ethiopian and other north African groups.

Some of that is wishful thinking, since it would require input from people more knowledgeable that what I have seen so far. But I do think a change in the title might encourage more input. I will try to add a section on pre-Reformation practice if I can find the time. But really, can't some other people add something more useful than what they read in the last church newsletter? MonteGargano (talk) 21:31, 18 November 2017 (UTC)


 * I don't think this article should be re-titled, as there are many distinct disciplinary practices under Catholic piety and canon law. But this page is a hot mess. I'm on it! Canon Law Junkie §§§ Talk 12:38, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Abstinence outside of Lent (in US)?
Okay, I grew up in Catholic schools from 1974 to 1987. I won awards for theology. I never heard of abstinence outside of Lent during this period. I never heard a syllable from any of the many nuns and priests, and a few bishops, I knew about abstinence/penance on ordinary Fridays. As far as I ever knew, up to the time of this writing, abstinence and penance were things no American Catholic had any business even thinking about on Friday’s outside of Lent. So what’s going on here? Antinoos69 (talk) 20:18, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
 * It seems my longtime understanding accords with the following:
 * Fast & Abstinence,
 * Pastoral Statement on Penance and Abstinence (Note, especially, point 24.)
 * It therefore seems the abstain or penance business is a Church calling, much ignored by all, rather than a Church law or rule. If so, the article should be modified to convey as much. The rather dubious source cited by the article, current note 29, appears to miss this distinction. Antinoos69 (talk) 20:43, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
 * The law of abstinence on every Friday is a discipline of universal law binding all Latin-rite Catholics. However, bishops conferences are allowed to make particular law for their regions with the approval of the Holy See. In the USA, for example, the obligation of abstinence on all Fridays was modified so that it was only binding during Lent, but during the rest of the year it could be substituted with another penitential practice, including prayer. The law of penance remains binding on every Friday, even though observances may vary. Canon Law Junkie §§§ Talk 12:42, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * As I read the two sources above, the idea of replacing abstinence with penance on ordinary Fridays in the US is merely a suggestion rather than an actual Church law, the breaking of which would necessarily involve committing sin. Note its complete absence from the first source. Again, no clergy member, nun, or theology teacher has ever even remotely suggested otherwise to me. If you think otherwise, you’ll have to cite several very explicit and authoritative sources. Antinoos69 (talk) 15:24, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * §22 of the Pastoral Statement retains Friday as "a special day of penitential observance". The entire document has the status of complementary norm promulgated in accordance with canon 1253 of the 1983 Code of Canon Law, which allows bishops' conferences to "determine more precisely the observance of fast and abstinence as well as substitute other forms of penance, especially works of charity and exercises of piety, in whole or in part, for abstinence and fast". The "traditional law of abstinence binding under pain of sin" is terminated "as the sole prescribed means of observing Friday" for the territory within the competence of the USCCB (§24), but the law of Friday penance, as a "universal law" (i.e. binding on all Latin Catholics) contained in canon 1250, is not thereby repealed, because a lower legislator (the USCCB) cannot validly issue a law contrary to that of a higher legislator (the 1983 code, which was promulgated by the pope) per canon 135 §2. The observance of some freely chosen penance is still binding legally and is not a mere suggestion, although the specific manner of observing the law of penance is now not legally binding—as it was when abstinence was the only prescribed way of satisfying the law of penance—and a few suggestions on what penance to freely choose are provided. Penance itself, however, remains a legal obligation on all Fridays and is not a mere suggestion. Here is a canonical secondary source written by an expert canon lawyer who interprets the universal canon law on this matter, canon 1250, which makes "every Friday of the whole year" a day of penance: "According to c. 1249, there is an obligation to do acts of penance on every penitential day and during every penitential time indicated in the canon..." (referring to canon 1250). It is truly a legal obligation. The USCCB simply broadened the legally acceptable ways of satisfying this legal obligation. I hope this is helpful! :) Canon Law Junkie §§§ Talk 08:39, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Nope, not buying it. Not only is that not the way I interpret the two sources originally cited above, but no Catholic educator I have ever known has ever so interpreted Church teaching on the matter. You’ll have to provide me with authorities speaking officially on behalf of the American Church that very explicitly and unmistakably provide your particular and highly peculiar interpretation. To be clear, that position is, as I understand it, that one must either abstain or do some other penance on all ordinary Fridays of the year, or by not so doing incur sin. Good luck. Antinoos69 (talk) 08:53, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
 * First off, it is not a matter of interpreting "church teaching"; it is a matter of interpreting church law, subject to the rules of legal interpretation. Second, I really don't mean for this to be a contentious discussion. However, the burden of proof is now on you, since I have provided a reputable secondary source which interprets the primary source and other sources in response to your request that "If you think otherwise, you’ll have to cite several very explicit and authoritative sources", while all you have done is personally interpret primary sources and cite your educational upbringing. I would politely request from you a reputable secondary source which supports your personal interpretation of the primary legal sources, in accordance with the Wikipedia policies WP:PRIMARY and WP:SECONDARY. Canon Law Junkie §§§ Talk 16:57, 26 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Nonsense. Your extraordinary and thoroughly counterintuitive claims require extraordinary evidence, which you fail to provide. Given the loads of babble habitually uttered about religion everywhere, let alone on the internet, your drivel certainly isn’t going to contravene years of in-person religious instruction. You’ll have to do a whole lot better. Good luck. Antinoos69 (talk) 17:14, 26 April 2019 (UTC)

=References=

Sedevacantist Catholic practice​
This is a recent addition and it doesn't really belong. I can see a purpose for historical pre-"Vatican II" practices, but in this group isn't part of the Catholic practice. Why not include fasting practices for people who believe something else weird about the pope? Dominick (TALK) 11:34, 1 April 2021 (UTC)