Abstinence: Meat and the Church

Having a conversation with a friend yesterday the topic of Abstinence came up. It reminded me of an argument that is often made that "abstaining from meat is silly nowadays because fish and meat don't hold the same place in our cultural menu's as they did in the past." I don't really know what people are arguing when they make this statement, because I don't know how they viewed what abstinence is supposed to do for us or to us during lent.

While reading blogs today I cam across a good post at The New Theological Movement that sums up the basic tenants of why we abstain, along with some nice Thomist analysis and teaching. The post is talking more about why we abstain from meat as opposed to other things and not just meat in general, but it gives glimpses into the basic question as well.

On this point, we notice that the Church Fathers (and even secular philosophers) held that meat excited the passions of the flesh. If we were to ask the early and medieval Christians why we should abstain from meat on Fridays, they would tell us, “Meat leads to concupiscence. Therefore, we abstain from meat, that our fleshly passions may be calmed.”

Aquinas said:

Now, generally speaking, eating flesh meat affords more pleasure than eating fish, although this is not always the case. Hence the Church forbade those who fast to eat flesh meat, rather than to eat fish.

This isn't a full Catechesis on the subject, just an overview, and actually one on a tangental question, but it does give some insight. For more Catechesis on why 'no meat' see: EWTN - Abstinence. Lots of people have arguments on why this is a bad practice or "outdated" but in reality it has some good grounding and it is universal in application. We can always do more, personally, for as you know some Saints died in the cells of their monastery while others at the stake. (No pun intended...)

†††