tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13804788.post375553912676107068..comments2024-03-27T11:27:31.790-05:00Comments on A Catholic Life: How St. Pius X & the 1917 Code of Canon Law Liberalized Fasting, Abstinence, and Holy Days of ObligationMatthewhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07929374709032473716noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13804788.post-88254731690505104182023-08-19T10:13:13.891-05:002023-08-19T10:13:13.891-05:00Fish became permitted by around the year 600 on da...Fish became permitted by around the year 600 on days of abstinence.<br /><br />For the complete history of all things related to this topic, see here: <br /><br />https://amzn.to/45dA0q9Matthewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07929374709032473716noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13804788.post-69031995746117744112023-08-19T09:45:27.671-05:002023-08-19T09:45:27.671-05:00Ah - I found the answer at your site:
https://aca...Ah - I found the answer at your site:<br /><br />https://acatholiclife.blogspot.com/2022/09/2023-traditional-catholic-fasting-and.html<br /><br />"Abstinence in this context refers to not eating meat. Meat refers to the fleshmeat of mammals or fowl. Beef, poultry, lamb, etc are all forbidden on days of abstinence. Abstinence does not currently prohibit animal byproducts like dairy (e.g. cheese, butter, milk) or eggs, but in times past they were prohibited. Fish is permitted along with shellfish and other cold-blooded animals like alligators."Brucenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13804788.post-24044491894742989242023-08-19T09:02:32.592-05:002023-08-19T09:02:32.592-05:00Thank you for this great piece. Did the abstinence...Thank you for this great piece. Did the abstinence days also include fish? I was under the impression that medieval Europeans ate a great deal of dried fish because of the abstinence restrictions and there's the old reference to Catholics being "Fisheaters."<br /><br />I'm very sympathetic to traditionalists and I didn't take the article to be in any way a jab at SSPX or other traditionalists. It's merely recognizing there were modernizing/liberalizing tendencies prior to the 1960s. This doesn't mean the Church defected. Likewise, the Church has struggled with its traditional teachings on usury with the rise of capitalism and modern financial institutions.<br /><br />I assume the Church was more strict in what it made obligatory when the nations it dwelled in were supportive. Then Catholics found themselves smack dab in the middle of Protestant nations and now, post-modernist nations. I suppose the faithful men like St. Pius X were trying to maximize the number of souls saved. The Pope who railed against modernism certainly wasn't a crypto-modernism.Brucenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13804788.post-70830790489793068802023-06-01T12:08:55.015-05:002023-06-01T12:08:55.015-05:00There may have been good reasons for reducing thes...There may have been good reasons for reducing these obligations in 1917, but not today. People today are soft, and they have been made that way. The Church is able to bind as well as loose; it is time to bind these rules more strongly.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13804788.post-49564011226402721722023-02-22T14:13:28.726-06:002023-02-22T14:13:28.726-06:00That would be an absurd equivocation. History may ...That would be an absurd equivocation. History may judge some matters done by Churchmen as wrong. Doesn't mean they taught heresy. One can also say that the some of the medieval popes lived sinful lives. One can criticize (and many do) the breviary reforms of Pope Urban VIII. Doesn't mean they defected. Matthewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07929374709032473716noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13804788.post-48654553101703068112023-02-22T14:07:53.788-06:002023-02-22T14:07:53.788-06:00You're basically saying the Church has failed ...You're basically saying the Church has failed and/or defected.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13804788.post-17190350362503309552021-08-19T14:36:49.021-05:002021-08-19T14:36:49.021-05:00This post had nothing whatsoever to do with castin...This post had nothing whatsoever to do with casting doubt on the SSPX. It is intended only to judge in hindsight the effect of St. Pius X's changes to days of precept and those of fasting/abstinence. And, as I stated, they in hindsight, only weakened our Catholic discipline, heritage, and life. Matthewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07929374709032473716noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13804788.post-4422051224987581552021-08-13T10:21:45.332-05:002021-08-13T10:21:45.332-05:00This article seems to be a veiled attempt to discr...This article seems to be a veiled attempt to discredit the SSPX by discrediting Pope St. Pius X who is their Patron. If one takes just a little bit of time to read the history books on the Industrial Revolution in Europe and the US in the latter half of the 1800's and basically throughout the 1900's, there are at least three major conditions in the world at that time that would have forced Pope St. Pius X and many other Bishops to take the actions that they did on fasting and Holy Days of Obligation.<br /><br />St. Matthew 23:2,3,4 quotes Jesus, Himself, as saying:<br />(V2) "The scribes and the Pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses.<br />(V3) "All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you observe and do: but according to their works do ye not; for they say, and do not.<br /><br />(V4) "FOR THEY BIND HEAVY AND INSUPPORTABLE BURDENS, AND LAY THEM ON MEN'S SHOULDERS; BUT WITH A FINGER OF THEIR OWN THEY WILL NOT MOVE THEM."<br /><br />During the time leading up to 1917, both the European and American continents were marked by what could unexaggeratingly be called slave labor. Even children were working 14-18 hours/day and every day 7 days/week. <br /><br />If you will read of Our Lady of La Salette, you will see Her prophecy of famine in Europe... The wheat crumbling in the farmer's hand. The farmers were forced off their farms by the famine and into the towns and cities to try to find work in the factories to feed their families. If anyone could not keep up on the job, their were literally hundreds in the streets ready and willing to take their places. The situation was basically no different throughout the United States as refugees poured in from Europe to find work. Husbands went to America in hopes of a job so that they could send money home to their families. Some, never to return. The competition for jobs brought on the same sweatshop conditions that existed in Europe for both adults and children.<br /><br />These men could not afford to take time off for sickness or injury or someone else would be hired that very day to take their place. If they were to feed themselves and their families, how could they take 35 Holy Days of Obligation off from work? How could they, themselves, survive 16-18 hour days and fast and abstain and maintain their health? Their meager wages would never suffice if they did. <br /><br />Throw in WWI, the Great Depression, and WWII and you see that for nearly 100 years ... a paradigm shift!!! In how people had to deal with their employers to stay alive!!!<br /><br />Now go back and reread these verses from St. Matthew 23 and ask yourself whether or not the Church at that time needed to "lift Her finger" of the pen of the Pope to relieve his children of these insupportable burdens laid on them by the slave labor barons of that time. These conditions still exist today in China and many Asian nations. <br /><br />MAN'S INHUMANITY TO MAN HAS UNFORTUNATELY NEVER TAKEN JESUS CHRIST SERIOUSLY LET ALONE HIS CHURCH! <br /><br />Some years ago, I read a story about an employer in Massachusetts who insisted, even though he was not a Catholic, on hiring Catholics with the proviso that they must go to Confession at least once a month to get and keep their jobs. He had found a way, so he thought, to force them to work long and hard to be honest and to give him what he prescribed to be a fair day's work and a fair day's pay, and they would not steal from him. <br /><br />When Jesus had 5000 people who had been with Him for three days, He would not send them home hungry, but rather performed one of His greatest public miracles and fed them all from a single basket of fish and bread lest they faint from hunger on their way home. No doubt for all these people in this predictement, Pope St. Pius X and the writers and promulgators of the Code of Canon Law of 1917 performed no less of a miracle than Jesus did. And He, Pope St. Pius X, being the Vicar of Christ, saw his obligation to relieve these poor souls through the same eyes that Christ did to feed the 5000. <br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />johnjohnii@yahoo.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16935479631423451190noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13804788.post-29738245828097800622021-05-20T15:13:15.219-05:002021-05-20T15:13:15.219-05:00It's becoming clear to more and more that the ...It's becoming clear to more and more that the true apostasy in the Catholic Church began centuries ago. Of course the Orthodox say the Catholic Church went apostate 1000 years ago, though some sedevacantists are starting to agree with this conclusion. More and more are refusing to attend sedevacantist, SSPX, or FSSP chapels as they learn history. <br /><br />I learned about the false changes of Pius X, the errors in the 1917 Code of Canon Law, and the evil teachings of Moral Theology that have been spread for hundreds of years. How could the true church allow all of this? Then I learned about the pagan beliefs of the papacy in the Renaissance. Things make more sense once you realize that the apostasy has been going on for hundreds of years, but only in the Renaissance and at Vatican II was it made more clear.<br /><br />Anyone who teaches you that we should just return to 1950s Catholicism is either ignorant or is a false teacher.adsr5583noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13804788.post-37280915314828850102021-04-13T21:55:41.935-05:002021-04-13T21:55:41.935-05:00So true.So true.Tancredhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16015531337154301560noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13804788.post-78796171195245271182021-04-13T10:28:28.171-05:002021-04-13T10:28:28.171-05:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13353872767408425068noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13804788.post-63801494768217922402021-04-08T22:14:39.813-05:002021-04-08T22:14:39.813-05:00In my opinion, Pope St. Pius X liberalized Fasting...In my opinion, Pope St. Pius X liberalized Fasting, Abstinence, and Holy Days of Obligation because the secularization of the world since the 19th century, many Catholics, such as workers, can't observe the old law of fasting, abstinence and Holy Days anymore, they have to work, and eat necessary food to have energy to work, to put food on their family's table. Plus, Catholics living in countries where non-Catholic is the majority was/is also placed in the same situation. Today, many Catholics still have to work hard on days such as Christmas Day and Good Friday. So the situation of Catholics at that time compelled St. Pius X to make the changes to relieve the burden for the faithful. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com