Will you eat meat tomorrow

Cydoniac wrote: »

Looking forward to some delicious steak...


I know, right? It's just another Cafeteria Catholic thing.

No it's not. A la carte Catholics are ones who pick and choose the rules they'll follow.
Fully practising Catholics are those who obey all the rules.
Lapsed Catholics are those who no longer feel governed by the rules.

And eejits are just eejits.

Melissa Mammoth Trademark wrote: »

You're so welcome. :rolleyes::D

:rolleyes::D:rolleyes::D

Ehh...not funny anymore...

Really though, the whole premise of Ash Wednesday is a bit of a farce when you consider most people partaking in it eat fish for a start (technically, fish is a type of meat, no matter how you want to argue it) and probably only see the inside of a church when it's a ceremony that benefits them (wedding/funeral/baptism) or on Christmas Day.

SmurfX wrote: »

It's a shame so many atheists & agnostics are driven to it by a hatred of the church and establishment rather than an appreciation of their own beliefs. I'm one myself but find most of them on the internet to be a truly insufferable bunch, entire communities united only by hate, cynicism, negativity and a dislike for popular society.

I acknowledge a place for religion, and respect fellow religious people, one being a Jehovah's Witness who visits our house regularly, shows a commitment to her beliefs and can only respect her for that. The establishment of the Catholic Church is utterly reprehensible though, such an awful history of crises, and don't have an awful lot of time for it. Consider that I have more of a distaste for that sect of religion itself than anything else.

munchkin_utd wrote: »

cold blooded beasties (snake/ frog/ aligator) are also allowed.
its the stupidest idiotic rule ever. If you look up canon law they cant even explain it except that it is the way it is

Eating a feed of salmon or monkfish or lobster or whatever is the craziest way of showing devotion to god or the church.

BTW, 5% meat content is allowed too aparantly, so you can add bacon bits to a soup to make it taste mighty meaty and its grand.

The idea, I think, is that meat - cow, pig, sheep, etc - was an expensive, rich, delicious treat back in the day.

People get caught up with the notion of "meat" on Ash Wednesday but the instruction is to fast and abstain in general. So no point eating no meat but 12 lobsters and an entire chocolate cake.

Fish was considered a relatively poor mans food - so that was ok. Plus, when Lent involved fasting/abstaining nearly every day, as it did in Medieval times, some leeway had to be given to keep monks upright in their stalls - and not collapsed with hunger.

Conroy_Band wrote: »

Yeah but my point is that by actual definition they are being a hypocrite.

Not really. It's not because they think eating meat is wrong. It's because they're calling on Catholics to make a sacrifice on Ash Wednesday. As another poster said, meat used to be considered more luxurious than fish which was plentiful and cheap, so maybe that's what's behind it.

I mean, it's not hypocritical for someone to give up chocolate for lent but still eat cake. They're just making a sacrifice for a while.

Conroy_Band wrote: »

Yeah but my point is that by actual definition they are being a hypocrite.

Just one more thing the church gets labelled as hypocritical for so :cool:

Why is it then that, at a wedding, we talk about "the meat or fish" option. There is a difference.

Rebellious - showing a desire to resist authority, control, or convention.

It's not really rebellious to eat meat on Ash Wednesday in all fairness...

Martin Luther posting his 95 theses on the door of the Castle Church of Wittenberg, now that was rebellious.

Cydoniac wrote: »

Actually, many people who never go to Mass get the mark on their forehead, wear it like a medal, and pretend to themselves that they're practicing Catholics and take a moral high ground against those who don't when really, they're hypocrites. That's my beef (no pun intended)

I don't think this is very common...

Also, you're judging these people that you believe to be judging others - who they may or may not be. Quit with all the judging! Just take people at face-value.

MonstaMash wrote: »

Rebellious - showing a desire to resist authority, control, or convention.

It's not really rebellious to eat meat on Ash Wednesday in all fairness...

Martin Luther posting his 95 theses on the door of the Castle Church of Wittenberg, now that was rebellious.

It's not the least bit rebellious. It might have been fifty years ago but now there are probably more people in Ireland eating meat today than not eating it.
But some people still seem to think they're about twelve years of age and that there's something cool about eating meat on Ash Wednesday. I mean, why else would you come on a forum to tell everyone you're having steak tonight and really looking forward to it?

rainbow kirby wrote: »

Do you seriously expect that when the general question is asked, particularly on AH, that only people who are following the Catholic practice will answer?

Where did I say that?

Conroy_Band wrote: »

I am not taking about the ethical reasoning for eating meat or not, my issue is with people making a point of saying they aren't eating meat when in fact they are.

Not to be a food snob but cake and chocolate do not fall under the same food group one is cake the other a sweet.

They aren't eating meat as defined by the Catholic Church on a particular day that's designated a fast day by that Church. If someone said they don't agree with people eating meat and then ate fish themselves I can see your point. But that's not what Catholics mean by abstaining from meat. They're following a rule of the religion they've chosen to adhere to. They're not stopping anyone else from eating meat or fish or anything else.

Melissa Mammoth Trademark wrote: »

They aren't eating meat as defined by the Catholic Church on a particular day that's designated a fast day by that Church. If someone said they don't agree with people eating meat and then ate fish themselves I can see your point. But that's not what Catholics mean by abstaining from meat. They're following a rule of the religion they've chosen to adhere to. They're not stopping anyone else from eating meat or fish or anything else.

Makes a change

rainbow kirby wrote: »

The thread question has a simple yes/no answer. The implication from almost all of your comments on this thread is that anyone who answers in the affirmative is only doing it to be "rebellious" or "edgy", which is far from the case.

No problem with people saying Yes, I'm eating meat. I don't really adhere to that rule/don't practise my religion anymore or whatever.

It's the people making silly 'oh yes, I'm going to be chomping into a big juicy plate of meat tomorrow and no priest is going to stop me'.. type posts that are childish and laced with a 'look how bold and disobedient I am' undertone. I presume people are allowed comment on that if they find it silly or sneery towards people with a religious belief?