Doing a little research and I came across this interesting piece of Vatican II that must have led them to allow eating meat on Fridays etc.
Bishop La Ravoire Morrow of Krishnagar, India, said the Church in the West seems to have become far too juridical. Many people could not understand how God could be expected to damn an individual to hell for eternity for such a thing as eating meat on Friday, and thus put him on a level with an adulterous atheist. There was no proportion between the deed and the punishment. The mentality behind such legislation seemed more legal than religious and made the Church a laughing-stock for many. It was well known that rules did not produce the desired effect, but only dulled the moral sense of the faithful. People did not generally need to be forced. Insistence on this kind of thing made real dialogue impossible.
What is a "piece of Vatican II"?
Unless I am missing something, V2 did not summarily permit the eating of meat on Friday. The Church did, around that time, leave it up to the discretion of national bishops' conferences, to derogate the practice outside of Lent, and to allow the faithful, at their discretion
, to substitute another penance or work of charity.
Of course, nobody heard this, all they heard is "we can now eat meat on Friday", and they don't give it a second thought. Where are all those acts of penance and charity? Ever hear anyone mention this?
Not clear whether the penitential obligation (i.e., either no meat, or something else) still binds under pain of mortal sin. I don't think it does in the UK. If it binds in the US, when was the last time you ever heard a Novus Ordo priest say anything about it?
Just don't eat the meat. It's so much simpler, and you have no doubt you have done what the Church requires.