Posted on 04/23/2009 9:57:33 AM PDT by NYer
I hear ya. I used to have that problem.
Our lizards eat leaves and bugs. The cashier at Wal-mart this morning asked me how I was planning to cook a big bunch of kale, and I said, “We don’t eat it - it’s for the dragons!” Honestly, I don’t think any humans eat kale.
um, penitance is all about sacrificing and being inconvenienced isn’t it? sacrificing when it’s convenient wouldn’t be very penitential. The bishop said it’s NOT mandatory. Nothing like being churlish and resentful while doing a penance....
Yeah and for her the appropriate penance would be to abstain from arrogantly being her own mistress once in a while.
Kale = poison ivy to me. Same with all that green leafy stuff. Yuck. Cabbage is OK. Arugula, romaine, iceberg. Bleck.
That’s okay - seafood has plenty of iron!
Put the collards on to boil ... go fishing ... nothing like collards, fried fish, and mashed potatoes.
I’ll take the fried fish with ketchup.
My homebrew Nut Brown Ale or Chocolate Stout, preferably.
” I do not completely buy into the fasting issues. Mainly because I forget all the time, life is too hectic, I am often on the road for my business, and drastic changes in diet tend to cause me some digestive problems.”
First, fasting is a mortification. It reminds us to remember the terrible suffering our Lord endured for us and our salvation. We mortify the senses during any day for many reasons. One is join in the Cross, another is to offer prayer for others, those ill, in danger, priests and religious, family.
Second, it establishes an ability to deny oneself something desired. That stregthens the Will to deny oneself inordinate, or sinful desires because a habit of denial has been established.
Third, if you cannot fast from meat, you can eat something else. McDonald’s fish fillet was created for Lent decades ago. But, your digestion is between you and God, and if your diocese does not require abstinance, then it’s a moot point.
You can fast in other ways: from losing your temper in heavy traffic, from talk radio, from the internet, from soft drinks, whatever.
*Just a suggestion and explanation.
I do not deliberately break the rules, but I refuse to feel any guilt, when I do forget.
I think the Church and the Faithful are involved in a classic “abusive relationship” -— where the person demanding “faithful observance” is often the tyrant, and the person trying to obey the “rules” is often the victim.
This is tyranny, when the truly faithful are asked to do more and more, while the beneficiaries of Catholic charities and the beneficiaries of Catholic institutions do whatever they want.
Would it not be more appropriate to focus instead on the actual recipient of the sacrifice, as in GOD, instead of permitting your resentments to carry you away? You have a problem with the Catholic Church and you are permitting it to interfere with your worship of God. Listen, no one has a gun to your head to do anything and a penance churlishly done is best not done at all. Why do i feel like i am talking to one of my kids who complains about needing to get up early to go to Mass? I tell them, think about how JESUS would feel, that you are more interested in sleeping in, than worshipping Him....
There was once a Catholic missionary who was sent to convert a tribe of cannibals. After a while he was visited by another missionary who asked him if he had made any progress in getting the tribesmen to stop eating people. He replied, "I've got them to the point that on Fridays they only eat fishermen."
They've kept it on - apparently it's popular. And a good thing, too, because I train dogs down in the country on Fridays (talk about mortification! I'm mortified regularly by the behavior of my dogs) and that's the only nearby place to get something to eat.
Ahem......could I try to clarify?
This was written by St. Paul in view of the belief then held by the Jews and latterly even today held by certain other faiths that various foods are unclean. IOW, in and of themselves, they are unfit to be consumed and offensive to God.
The Catholic Church and the bishop of Steubenville in particular are not saying that meat is unclean nor offensive to God. We can eat as much meat as we like without transgressing any law. Rather, the bishop is saying that for one day per week, some form of penance and self-sacrifice is required. Seeing as meat is a food to which many are devoted and the consumption of which is greatly enjoyed, the Church chooses ,it as the preferred vehicle of self-denial.
Hope that you can see the difference.
Obviously, Church leaders are not listening to God, but they might well listen to the flock, should we let them know that they can not count on blind obedience.
I think I do see the difference. I just think that when church authorities make an edict or what have you about what or when you can eat, they are overstepping their authority. I don’t doubt that they mean well.
“It’s all “I invite”, “this will not be a requirement of law”, etc.”
I didn’t pick up on that, and in that case, objection withdrawn!
“Have you never offered up a personal sacrifice to God in atonement for your sins?”
Are you serious? If so, no. I can not atone for my own sins.
So he was supposed to rise, kill and eat Gentiles? :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.