Catholic Info
Traditional Catholic Faith => General Discussion => Topic started by: Donato on January 31, 2016, 09:59:45 PM
-
If someone would be kind enough to help me out in true charity it would be much appreciated.
I wanted to know if drinking liquid protein shots (diluted with water) would break fasting rules; I don't wish to be relative, but I don't see how drinking something with less calories than, say orange juice, would be breaking fast rules. I also take hemp powder 1-2x a day, dissolved into water.....is this also ok, or is does this break fast rules. Thanks in advance for any help,
Donato
-
If someone would be kind enough to help me out in true charity it would be much appreciated.
I wanted to know if drinking liquid protein shots (diluted with water) would break fasting rules; I don't wish to be relative, but I don't see how drinking something with less calories than, say orange juice, would be breaking fast rules. I also take hemp powder 1-2x a day, dissolved into water.....is this also ok, or is does this break fast rules. Thanks in advance for any help,
Donato
The reason meat is given up on days of fasting is because at the time when the idea was conceived of fasting meat was considered a treat. Most people were too poor to afford meat so it was a rare treat at that. I don't think it would be a sin to use protein shakes on a day of fasting. You don't have the taste of meat in a protein shake and you're really are just drinking it for health reasons rather than matters of taste. If someone knows of a rule banning protein shakes on days of fasting please share, but to my knowledge there is no rule against protein shakes on days of fasting.
-
The reason meat is given up on days of fasting is because at the time when the idea was conceived of fasting meat was considered a treat. Most people were too poor to afford meat so it was a rare treat at that. I don't think it would be a sin to use protein shakes on a day of fasting. You don't have the taste of meat in a protein shake and you're really are just drinking it for health reasons rather than matters of taste. If someone knows of a rule banning protein shakes on days of fasting please share, but to my knowledge there is no rule against protein shakes on days of fasting.
:facepalm: :laugh1: :roll-laugh1:
The Church has a long history with fasting, and it has nothing to do with meat being considered a treat. Do you seriously believe that?
-
There's nothing wrong whatsoever with a non-meat-based protein shake (whey, hemp, etc.)
-
If someone would be kind enough to help me out in true charity it would be much appreciated.
I wanted to know if drinking liquid protein shots (diluted with water) would break fasting rules; I don't wish to be relative, but I don't see how drinking something with less calories than, say orange juice, would be breaking fast rules. I also take hemp powder 1-2x a day, dissolved into water.....is this also ok, or is does this break fast rules. Thanks in advance for any help,
Donato
It wouldn't break the rules of fasting. Fasting does not permit eating between meals, but does allow for liquids including milk, which has virtually the same number of calories as protein and hemp powder shakes. If you use Whey as the protein source it is a milk protein anyway, so what's the difference?
As for meals, one main meal and two other meals that do not (in aggregate) exceed to volume of the main meal.
-
The reason meat is given up on days of fasting is because at the time when the idea was conceived of fasting meat was considered a treat. Most people were too poor to afford meat so it was a rare treat at that. I don't think it would be a sin to use protein shakes on a day of fasting. You don't have the taste of meat in a protein shake and you're really are just drinking it for health reasons rather than matters of taste. If someone knows of a rule banning protein shakes on days of fasting please share, but to my knowledge there is no rule against protein shakes on days of fasting.
:facepalm: :laugh1: :roll-laugh1:
The Church has a long history with fasting, and it has nothing to do with meat being considered a treat. Do you seriously believe that?
Well that was my understanding yes. I am also aware that the Church has a long history of fasting and that's my whole point. It's a long standing reverence to Christ much like giving up something for lent. If you can manage to pull yourself of the floor laughing, and explain to me why this view is wrong like a human being, it would be well recieved. But if all you have is ridicule maybe you should find higher purpose in life than insulting someone who's willing to learn, given proper teacher.
-
As for meals, one main meal and two other meals that do not (in aggregate) exceed to volume of the main meal.
I thought the rule was that the two collations cannot equal the main meal, not simply exceed it.
If the rule was simply that the collations cannot exceed the main one, then you would be having 2 full meals, 1 of them broken up throughout the day.
Why don't the ones who ask about basic fasting things simply read the catholic encyclopedia article about it? It has all the info one needs. Or ask a priest.
And how could the Church forbid shakes if everyone here, explicitly or implicitly, believes there has been no authority since 1958, and therefore the Chuch hasn't ruled on such things since they came after 1958?
-
As for meals, one main meal and two other meals that do not (in aggregate) exceed to volume of the main meal.
I thought the rule was that the two collations cannot equal the main meal, not simply exceed it.
If the rule was simply that the collations cannot exceed the main one, then you would be having 2 full meals, 1 of them broken up throughout the day.
Why don't the ones who ask about basic fasting things simply read the catholic encyclopedia article about it? It has all the info one needs. Or ask a priest.
And how could the Church forbid shakes if everyone here, explicitly or implicitly, believes there has been no authority since 1958, and therefore the Chuch hasn't ruled on such things since they came after 1958?
It is equal, not exceed.
-
As for meals, one main meal and two other meals that do not (in aggregate) exceed to volume of the main meal.
I thought the rule was that the two collations cannot equal the main meal, not simply exceed it.
If the rule was simply that the collations cannot exceed the main one, then you would be having 2 full meals, 1 of them broken up throughout the day.
Why don't the ones who ask about basic fasting things simply read the catholic encyclopedia article about it? It has all the info one needs. Or ask a priest.
And how could the Church forbid shakes if everyone here, explicitly or implicitly, believes there has been no authority since 1958, and therefore the Chuch hasn't ruled on such things since they came after 1958?
It is equal, not exceed.
The catholic encyclopedia of 1913 actually says no more than 8 ounces. I made a mistake.
What's your source for that?
-
As for meals, one main meal and two other meals that do not (in aggregate) exceed to volume of the main meal.
I thought the rule was that the two collations cannot equal the main meal, not simply exceed it.
If the rule was simply that the collations cannot exceed the main one, then you would be having 2 full meals, 1 of them broken up throughout the day.
Why don't the ones who ask about basic fasting things simply read the catholic encyclopedia article about it? It has all the info one needs. Or ask a priest.
And how could the Church forbid shakes if everyone here, explicitly or implicitly, believes there has been no authority since 1958, and therefore the Chuch hasn't ruled on such things since they came after 1958?
It is equal, not exceed.
The catholic encyclopedia of 1913 actually says no more than 8 ounces. I made a mistake.
What's your source for that?
Guidelines for traditional penitential practices: Fr. Peter Scott, SSPX
Here are the traditional rules of fast and abstinence as observed per the 1962 liturgical calendar and outlined in Canons 1250-1254 of the 1917 Code of Canon Law.
Who was bound to observe these laws?
The law of abstinence bound all Catholics, beginning on the day after their 7th birthday.
The law of fasting bound all Catholics, beginning on the day after their 21st birthday and ending at the midnight which completed their 59th birthday. [Note: The USA's particular law has lowered the obligatory fasting age to 18.]
What was forbidden and allowed to be eaten?
The law of abstinence forbade the eating of flesh meat and of broth made of meat, but did not exclude the use of eggs, dairy products, or seasonings made from the fat of animals.
The law of fasting prescribed that only one full meal a day was taken with two smaller meals that did not equal the main one.
As to the kind of food and the amount that might be taken, the approved customs of the place were to be observed. It was not forbidden to eat both flesh meat and fish at the same meal, nor to interchange the midday and evening meals.
In the Universal Church
Abstinence was obligatory on all Fridays, except on Holy Days of Obligation outside of Lent.
Fasting and complete abstinence were obligatory on the following days:
Ash Wednesday
Fridays and Saturdays in Lent
Good Friday
Holy Saturday (until noon[1]—the end of the Easter Vigil Mass)
Ember Days (Wednesday, Friday and Saturday)
Vigil of Pentecost
Vigil of Christmas
[NB: both the Vigils of the Immaculate Conception and All Saints were omitted from the 1962 calendar]
Partial abstinence
Fasting and partial abstinence were obligatory on all other weekdays of Lent (i.e., Monday through Thursday—Friday was always complete abstinence); this meant that meat could be eaten at the principal meal on these days.
Some further clarifications to universal laws
There are few more distinctions to take into account fasting and abstaining when a usual fast day was in concurrence with a Sunday (always a non-fast day):
1. Sundays throughout the year and Holy Days of Obligation outside of Lent cancelled the fasting and/or abstinence of any penitential day which coincided.
2. If a fast-day Vigil fell on Sunday, the fasting and abstinence associated with the Vigil were not anticipated on the Saturday, but dropped altogether that year.
Particular rules observed in the USA
On January 28, 1949, the United States bishops issued a statement modifying the regulations of fasting and abstinence in America (thus differing slightly from the universal laws) after receiving a ruling from the Sacred Congregation of the Council.
Fasting and partial abstinence was obligatory on the following days:
1. Ember Wednesdays and Saturdays
2. Vigil of Pentecost
3. all other weekdays of Lent including Saturdays
Liquids, including milk and fruit juices, might be taken at any time on a day of fast, but “other works of charity, piety, and prayer for the pope should be substituted” to compensate for this relaxation.
Pope Pius XI granted in 1931 a dispensation to American Catholics from having to abstain on the Friday following the national Thursday holiday of Thanksgiving.
The United States bishops had the faculties to dispense the faithful from the obligation to fast and abstain on penitential days that fell on civic holidays.
-
What was forbidden and allowed to be eaten?
The law of fasting prescribed that only one full meal a day was taken with two smaller meals that did not equal the main one.
Your source says the same thing I'm saying.
Both meals taken together cannot equal the main one.
-
What was forbidden and allowed to be eaten?
The law of fasting prescribed that only one full meal a day was taken with two smaller meals that did not equal the main one.
Your source says the same thing I'm saying.
Both meals taken together cannot equal the main one.
That's correct.