Can Catholics Eat Chicken on Fridays During Lent?

You’re surprised by this? You really haven’t been keeping up with the Catholics lately, have you Hemant?

That’s hilarious “oh we have given up so much to god by going to red lobster every week, I think we can take a break from all this hardship”

You know, I could understand this if you were trapped in the mountains and all you had to eat was beef jerky. The God of the Old Testament would still then just say “starve for the day.”

But when Christians think that these silly little “loopholes” and bent rules are going to pass THE CREATOR OF THE UNIVERSE. I, as an unbeliever, have more respect for the concept of almighty and all knowing god than they do. If I believed in such a deity, I’d realize that you can’t trick such a being. How dumb do they think their god is? GAH.

Sorry, had to spend time with my overly religious extended family today… I’m a little bitter now.

As a former Catholic, I have heard of this. It is common for events such as weddings and other group meetings where there may be a mixed crowd. Lenten restrictions include (from a catechism website):

“Abstinence from meats is to be observed by all Catholics 14 years old and older on Ash Wednesday and on all Fridays of Lent.

Fasting is to be observed on Ash Wednesday by all Catholics who are 18 years of age but not yet 59. Those who are bound by this may take only one full meal. Two smaller meals are permitted if necessary to maintain strength according to one’s needs, but eating solid foods between meals is not permitted.”

In my household as a kid, the one meal thing didn’t really happen. We ate breakfast and lunch anyway.

I was born after Vatican II in the early sixties when the pope changed a bunch of rules. As I understand it EVERY Friday was no meat until then. Now it’s just a Lenten thing.

As a former Catholic I don’t see what the big deal is here. Giving up meat on Friday’s during Lent is just a communal sacrifice made by all Catholics. It’s a community builder through a shared experience. It makes perfect sense that the priest would lift a call for shared sacrifice during a celebration like a wedding. There’s no magic involved at all. This isn’t transubstantiation. The church requests this of it’s members and they generate exceptions to that request when it is appropriate.

Wouldn’t it be less reasonable to force people at a wedding celebration to abstain from meat?

You can eat meat on fridays. Nobody cares. I ate tuna sandwiches on fridays anyways, just because it is tradition (and a tasty tradition at that). It’s not any more unreasonable than, say, the practice of making new years resolutions every year. In fact, it’s probably more reasonable, since nobody actually keeps their resolutions past February.

The reason you might need a special dispensation is because at a wedding reception, you have a lot of people, and maybe some of those people take the tradition more seriously than they should. So you need some religious authority to tell everybody, “Naw, it’s totally cool, guys.”

Leastways, that’s how I always saw it. Um, I’m guessing that I’m not necessarily representative of Catholics.

This used to be a requirement for all Fridays, not just during lent. However, in Puerto Rico, in the late 1800’s to early 1900’s, Fridays were usually the only days people could get meat (and there was no refrigeration), so the Pope gave the whole island a dispensation from that requirement.

You’re losing sight of the important thing: Friday’s during Lent the employee cafeteria always serves fish sandwiches.

I love fish sandwiches.

Don’t screw this up for me.

A friend of mine’s 11-yr-old daughter gave up chocolate for lent, but her grandpa gave her special dispensation to partake of the delicious candy while she is on spring break.

her grandpa.

huh????? so God is ok with it as long as grandpa is?

I know a lot of Catholics. I don’t think I know even a single one who observes the fasting rules. I got married in a Catholic church. When we went to meet the priest for the first time, my wife was quuite concerned. She had heard all kinds of horror stories about priests making non-catholic fiancés jump through hoops, make all kinds of promises, sign away all rights to their future children’s religious upbringing, etc. His first words were, “don’t worry, I’m not going to ask Paul to convert. I have enough non-practising Catholics in this parrish already.” There was a guy who knew what was really going on in his church.

I went to a big chamber dinner in a southwest suburb two years ago where there was an option for fish or steak. They actually had a priest give special dispensation so the guests could partake in the steak. There were quite a few rumblings in the crowd because you had to choose your meal beforehand. There was more than one “If I had only known . . ” heard that evening.

So, if priests can push the “pause” button on sins for others, can they do it for themselves?
Like say when that cute choirboy is being so darned seductive?

Odd. I thought that Catholics weren’t supposed to get married during Lent.

Hement wrote:

So let’s recap:

Meat on Fridays during Lent is bad. Very bad. Forbidden, even.
If a Priest gives you permission and works his voodoo magic, though, it’s totally fine. I know I’m asking this to the wrong crowd, but how does that make any sense?

It makes perfect sense because, as I said in a previous thread, religion today is all about building up political power for so-called church leaders and not about worshiping god. When Jesus went to a party he washed everyone’s feet. He did not stand up at the front of the room and dictate to them what they could and could not eat. Christianity has become so perverted that I think they really should call it something else. So-called Christians today clearly don’t follow the teachings of Christ.

I’m having trouble understanding the types of reactions that many of you are having toward this. The Lenten abstinence from meat on Fridays is not an inherent moral issue. Rather obedience to the church’s authority and the need for penance is the issue.

Let’s say that your mother said you couldn’t have cookies within an hour before dinner. If you snuck a cookie, your mother would have good reason to be disappointed in you, but if she decided to let you have one on your birthday, you wouldn’t be up in arms over the mother’s willingness to break her sacred moral code of no cookies before dinner. She didn’t say, “You can disobey me,” but rather “I’m telling you a different rule.”

I’m sure someone will accuse me of being “traitor” and “helping the other side,” but there’s nothing wrong with being logical in your criticism. All this talk about allowing sin is absurd and does nothing but show believers (and unbelievers) that you don’t have a good idea of the morality at issue.

Stronger criticism is found in other posts, pointing out that it’s not at all sacrifice to eat seafood instead of chicken, beef or pork. Going to Red Lobster is not hardship. It’s delicious. Also, you could lament their willingness to change their rules not as a contradiction, but out of laziness and inconvenience.

Out of curiosity, why isn’t fish considered to be “meat”? I mean, it’s still the flesh of a living creature that you are killing to consume. I’ve also always been confused by vegetarians who don’t eat meat (except for fish) for moral reasons. What, you just don’t eat the cute fluffy ones?? What kind of moral code is that? I don’t get it.

I work with a Catholic woman and have asked her about this practice a few times (since I’ve seen her eating meat on Lenten Fridays). Her priest told her … they should try not to eat meat on Fridays … but, if it’s offered to you it’s rude to not eat it. So, apparently her church doesn’t really take it seriously at all.

@cheerfulatheist:

Allegedly, there was a pope who had significant fishing interests, who changed the rules.

Wouldn’t it be less reasonable to force people at a wedding celebration to abstain from meat?

Oh, come on, eating pasta for one meal is hardly going to kill you. I am a vegetarian, and if I ever get married (which… eh) I would pick something for my wedding dinner that I could eat.

Cheerfulatheist- I have no idea why some “vegetarians” eat fish and pretend its not meet. Please, people, go eat whatever you want, but don’t eat fish and call yourself vegetarians. I am tired of explaining to people that I don’t care what Sally does and then calls herself, but I do not eat fish.

Can the priest recite “Special Dispensation” 3 times, turn around, click his heels, then perform a wedding for a same-sex couple?

I think the justification for the lower age limit is that young kids wouldn’t be aware of why they were giving it up and it isn’t a useful discipline unless you know why. The older age limit might be anyone 60 and above got classified as ‘ill’ automatically and so exempt though they could observe if they chose (otherwise those 60+ and ill would have to ask a priest for an individual exemption and that might overwhelm the poor fellas).

As a recovering Catholic, I still will occasionally give things up for Lent. A little self discipline can be good for you sometimes, arbitrary or not. As for the special dispensation thing, one thing the Catholic church has going for it over protestant churches (on paper at least) is the human hierarchy over strict biblical interpretation. Now sure, this leads to a different kind of abuse, blah, blah, we could go all day, but it also allows for a human agent of the church to allow exceptions to arbitrary church law for the greater good (whether this particular instance was worthy of such a dispensation is another matter).

Really though, if a man says that his Lenten sacrifice is going to be to run a mile everyday, and then he comes down with pneumonia, the priest might give him a special dispensation so he won’t feel like he’s sinning or breaking his promise to God by not still trying. At it’s most idealistic, a special dispensation is a tool of the church to keep religious faith from becoming counterproductive.

Must..eat…flesh of another…living creature..can’t go…several hours! May die….!

The closest thing I can think of is when the president gives all DC federal workers a holiday (exemption) because its snowing.

Its not supposed to generally happen, but there are exceptions to SOME rules… Other rules, of course, the president would never make exceptions.

From another site that answered similar question:

Can Catholics eat chicken on Fridays during Lent?
In: Catholicism [Edit categories] [Edit]

[Edit]
Most people say no but some say Yes

Lent is based on Christ’s 40-day fast in the desert, representing the 40 years that the Hebrews wandered in the desert after leaving Egypt and before entering Israel.

The Catholic Church’s abstinence laws consider that meat comes only from LAND animals such as chicken, cattle and pigs-all of which live on land. Birds are also considered meat; on these grounds chicken is prohibited.
Fish are a different category of animal- sea animals and therefore are permitted to be eaten during lent.
yes. read this answer from http://www.catholic.com:

Q: Can you offer any biblical justification for the Catholic Church’s former teaching that it’s sinful to eat meat on Fridays?

A: Yes, but, if you recognize the fact that Christ’s Church is divinely authorized to teach, sanctify, and govern, there should be no need to “prove” it with biblical examples. If you don’t recognize that, consider the following biblical facts.

Jesus guaranteed that when his Church teaches it teaches with his authority and that anyone rejecting his Church’s teachings rejects him (Luke 10:16). This authority extends to Church discipline as well as doctrine. When the Church imposes a discipline, its members are bound to obey it, unless they are dispensed for a proportionate reason.

This exercise of authority is seen in Acts 15, where the Church, in its first major council, bound all Christians to the discipline of abstaining from meat that had been sacrificed to idols or that had come from strangled animals (19-29). When the Church promulgated its teaching about abstaining from meat (Acts 15:28-29), no Christian was free to disregard the discipline without committing sin. But since Paul explained that meat in itself is not unclean and the eating of meat is not inherently sinful (Rom. 14:1-23, 1 Cor. 8:1-13, 10:23-32), a Christian who violated the apostolic teaching in Acts 15 sinned not because the eating of meat was wrong but because he disobeyed a commandment of the Church. When the Catholic Church imposes a discipline such as not eating meat on Fridays, the same principle holds.

Consider this parallel example. A mother tells her son not to eat the cookies she just baked because it’s close to dinner time and eating the cookies will spoil his appetite. The son ignores his mother’s wishes and, when she’s not looking, sneaks a few cookies. His sin is not the eating of cookies (a morally-neutral act in itself), but of disobedience.

Finally, we should mention why Friday abstinence was imposed. The Church recognizes that, since meat is a chief part of most meals served in most places, and since meat is usually the most valued or expensive part of a meal, abstinence from meat on Fridays is a good way for Christians to unite themselves more closely to the sufferings of their Lord (Rom. 8:16-17, 1 Pet. 2:21) by denying themselves something they enjoy. Abstinence from meat is a sacrifice which unites them in penance and strengthens the solidarity of the Church through mild suffering. It’s also a good form of mortification, which disciplines the soul and strengthens its resistance to concupiscence. Paul practiced and recommended mortification: “I drive my body and train it, for fear that after having preached to others, I myself should be disqualified” (1 Cor. 9:27).

Has anyone addressed the fact that this wedding took place DURING LENT? Catholics do not solemnize weddings during Lent. I don’t think this story is even real.

These Catholics did 🙂 As as the post indicates, I was there and the story is real.

If you think Catholics are good about bending the law on a whim, you should take a look a judaism! Orthodox jewish men are supposed to go to synagogue 3 times a day, but their employer might object to them leaving for an hour or so in the middle of the day, so they have two evening “services” or whatever they call them and those are *planned* to coincide, so you get your three times in by going only twice. Someone explain to me why they don’t just make the rule that you have to go twice, if that’s really all it takes!

Maryjo,

This is going to get snarky, but you came on to a very popular atheist blog to preach at us, and that can happen…

I’m confused as to why atheists or others need to make fun of religions.

We don’t need to, we just enjoy it. Ridiculous beliefs have a way of ending up as the objects of ridicule. You’re a Catholic — we laugh at the cracker stuff. We laugh at Scientologists with their interstellar airplanes and aliens in volcanoes. We laugh at Monty Python. We have a sense of humor.

I almost feel that there must be some deep internal void that one needs to ridicule religion in hopes of reassuring oneself of their belief.

We have a deep internal void? We have to reassure ourselves of our belief? You’re the one who clings to supernatural beliefs without evidence.

Seriously, consider this: many atheists, most of us perhaps, were born into religious families and considered ourselves religious. Eventually, the unanswered questions piled up too deeply, the lies and corruption of the religious leaders became impossible to ignore, and most of all, we realized that the folklore of bronze-age desert dwellers, as interpreted by a hundred generations of mullahs and priests, bears no resemblance to reality. One by one we abandoned the faith of our childhoods. So we’ve been where you are, we’ve just moved on. Take care yourself.

It’s a Precept of the Church to not each meat on Fridays during Lent because we are trying to focus on the upcoming celebration of Easter and remind ourselves of the sacrifice that Jesus made for us. It is a very minor little material sacrifice that we make (to not eat meat) yet it does effectively do what it was intended to do — remind us that what Jesus did was far greater.

As for getting a dispensation from the Bishop — yes, those are granted for specific reasons. Normally the Bishop would probably discourage a wedding on a Friday in Lent and I’m certain no Catholic wedding would be held on Good Friday. Still, it’s not prohibited to get married on a Friday in Lent so at the Bishop’s discretion he could grant dispensation for the participants. Normally these dispensations encourage you to make some sort of other sacrifice or pious act to maintain the spirit.

There is no “voodoo”. This is Sacred Tradition that recognizes our material bodies are immaterial in the end — it is our soul that matters. A wee sacrifice of not eating meat on Fridays during Lent is a little reminder. If you forget, you forget. Confess it the next time you go to confession (which again, according to the Precepts of the Church should be at least once a year) and try and remember to offer up the sacrifice the next Friday. Don’t blow it off but don’t panic if you forget. It’s not a mortal sin — you are not thrown out of a state of grace for having eaten meat on a Friday in Lent. Perspective matters.

As for atheists being more mature for having moved on, I would suggest that perhaps you really haven’t spent much time learning about the faith or the Catholic Church. It is far more complex and well-grounded in logic than most believe. Yes, faith matters, yes mystery exists. But learned theologians are not simple minds caught up in a fantasy construct.

You may not wish to take the time to learn our faith but please don’t profess to understand it and say you have moved on. Unless you are a retired theologian — then, let’s talk.