Posted on 11/09/2009 9:03:16 PM PST by GonzoII
Yes. That is the spiritual value of it, at public meals. Same with blessing oneself in a restaurant.
I don’t think God is imposing that burden on me.
The requirement to know and understand the Catholic faith is not binding on non-Catholics, but, of course, lack of interest in the Catechism is, on some level, a lack of interest in Christianity.
The relevant document regarding the fasting legalities is not the Catechism, by the way. The easiest thing is to ask your priest what to do, or if you suspect that his advice is inaccurate, research some more.
I fast on Friday because I want to express my love of Christ in that simple and direct way. If you had not asked, I would not have a reason to research it further.
I do recommend people of any religion to read the Catechism. Here it is: CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. If that is too voluminous, here is a Reader's Digest version: Compendium OF THE CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.
I don’t think so. It’s full of doctrines of man. I’ll stick with what God requires of me.
The authority of the Church is not from men. Sticking to your own doctrine, however, is.
It IS from men. Jesus never told me that I would go to hell if I refused to abstain from meat on Friday and then didn’t participate in a manmade ritual of absolution.
That is true. But He gave the authority to legislate in such matters to the Church (Mt 18:17-18), and the Church legislated in a certain way. If you mean that you personally do not have the duty to obey the Church, you may be right if you are not Catholic, but if you are Catholic and do not obey the Church then you are "as the heathen and publican", not likely to be saved.
manmade ritual of absolution
The confessionary is man made, and the priest is a man, and you can perhaps say that the ritualistic part of the sacrament of confession is man-made. However, the sacrament itself is divinely decreed: "Receive ye the Holy Ghost. 23 Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained" (John 20:22f). Absolution, -- forgiveness of sin -- is one possible outcome of the sacrament of confession.
Perhaps not a big sacrifice ... except that the idiots in the kitchen don't know fish anywhere near as well as they know beef. And it provides a small opportunity for a small witness to Christ. Never pass up an opportunity ... even the small ones.
But if you keep reading, just a few lines later Jesus calls Peter "Satan" and tells him "You do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men" (Matt 16:23)
Pretty harsh words for the new pope.
Keep reading Matthew. In the 28th chapter, when Jesus has been resurrected from the dead, he has some very important things to say to Peter and company:
"And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Matthew 28:18-20
Jesus never relinquished His authority here on Earth! Why would He need to? He knows all men are sinners. He is with us always! He said so, and I know it's true.
And notice he instructed the desciples to teach what HE commanded them, not what they chose to command us.
I'll depend on His Word - it's never let anyone down.
No, I meant the passage that I indicated, Mt 18:17-18, where Jesus explains that the Church — not you and not your pastor — is the final rule of faith.
It is true that all popes are flawed human beings starting with St. Peter himself. The issue on hand, however, — rules of fasting — are within episcopal authority, not papal authority. If you have questions about the papacy, I’d be happy to answer, but it is somewhat unrelated to the topic.
It is also true that Jesus has the ultimate authority in all matters. The role of the Church is indeed to teach us all the He commands, and he commanded us to fast, just as He fasted Himself (see the main article).
A Brother Who Sins Against You
"If your brother sins against you, go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that 'every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses'. If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector. Matthew 18:15-17
This is about resolving disputes between believers. You talk to the one who wronged you, but if that doesn't resolve it, you take it before a couple other believers. If that doesn't bring resolution, you bring it before the entire body of believers, who then can ostrasize him, if that's what it takes.
I can't understand what this has to do with fish on Friday rules and Jesus abdicating His authority..
Matthew 18:15f has to do with any contention between Christians, including whether or not to fast in particular manner on a particular day. The Church is given as a final arbiter.
And please how me where God commanded us to fast.
It says “if your brother sins against you” It doesn’t say, “if your brother demands that you fast and you don’t think you should have to”
Jesus said that we shall fast (Mk 2:20. Mt 9:15) and fasted himself (Mt 4:2). St. Paul directed us to "exhibit ourselves as the ministers of God" by a variety of mortifications, including fasting (1 Cor. 6:4f). So, Catholic Christians fast.
It doesn’t say, “if your brother demands that you fast and you don’t think you should have to”
Well, what are you doing on this thread then? Your fellow Christians fast and urge others to fast and you apparently take offense. We have a dispute. We should ask the Church, which shall "bind and loose" in all matters (Mt 18:18). I have.
I am not the least bit offended. I just have questions, and I can’t get a clear answer.
You know that the two passages you cited in Mark and Matthew are the retelling of a parable Jesus told. It was about having and not having Jesus here on earth. Having Him here is the feasting, not having Him is the “fasting”. I know you’ve been told otherwise, but can’t you see it for yourself?
Not one place in scripture are we commanded to fast, although it can be a very good and useful practice. But it must be willingly undertaken or it is empty.
1 Cor 6 is another passage about resolving disputes among believers. It says we are supposed to resolve them within the community, not take it to a secular court of law.
Nothing there about “mortification” or fasting.
What is your remaining question(s)?
Your interpretation of Mk 2 and Mt 9 is, I guess, possible, but it is not the natural interpretation that arises from the text alone. The disciples of John were not referring to a metaphorical fast, but rather to an actual fast, because such was the fast of St. John the Baptist. There is no warrant to say that Jesus all of a sudden began to talk in metaphors. In fact, I am pretty sure He did not because otherwise he would have implicitly rebuked St. John for physical fasting.
I showed you the verse, 1 Cor. 6:4f, where St. Paul commanded us to fast. It is also mentioned in the article itself.
Regarding “willingly undertaken”, the US Bishops seem to agree with you, this is why they gave to option to do some other form of mortification instead. Still, the Church is here for no other purpose but to lead us to salvation in Christ; it is therefore the Church’s duty to set up necessary obligations and not allow us to solely depend on our own whim.
Indeed. I meant 2 Cor 6:4f, sorry.
4 But in all things let us exhibit ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience, in tribulation, in necessities, in distresses, 5 In stripes, in prisons, in seditions, in labours, in watchings, in fastings, 6 In chastity, in knowledge, in longsuffering, in sweetness, in the Holy Ghost, in charity unfeigned, 7 In the word of truth, in the power of God; by the armour of justice on the right hand and on the left; 8 By honour and dishonour, by evil report and good report; as deceivers, and yet true; as unknown, and yet known; 9 As dying, and behold we live; as chastised, and not killed; 10 As sorrowful, yet always rejoicing; as needy, yet enriching many; as having nothing, and possessing all things.
Mentioning fasting, as in 2 Cor 6:4 is not a commandment. Fasting, as I said, can be a good thing. But you still haven’t shown me anything that even hints of a commandment. Much less risking your eternal soul by not doing so.
My translation actually says “hunger” instead of fasting, but the meaning of the passage is the same I think.
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.