NationStates Jolt Archive

I've decided, after consulting with a nurse and a few Muslims (Muslims have a period of fasting called Ramadan, which is still practiced these days) to fast (or sorta fast) for Lent, having no food each day except a meal in the evening (and possibly two smaller meals as was/is advocated by the Roman Catholic church, which must not together make up a full meal - though I will try to avoid them). I will still drink water. I've decided to also give up something else for Lent, which I will not detail here.

However, it would seem that fasting on a Sunday is considered inappropriate as Sundays are to celebrate the resurrection of Jesus (Lent, which incidentally was originally a time of fasting (or fasting in a way the same or similar to the way I have decided to do it) and which as far as I am aware is still a time when Roman Catholics must refrain from eating meat, is a period to remember the period of 40 days that Jesus, according to the Holy Bible, spent in the wilderness, fasting and being tempted (by the devil according to the Holy Bible)).

To me, 6 days a week doesn't seem like a very long time to fast and I'd rather do it for the full 46 days. However, I don't want to be doing something which could be seen by Jesus as something negative - commemorating His fasting (which happened quite some time before His death as recorded in the Holy Bible - NOT after His death and resurrection) when I should be celebrating His resurrection.

So what do you think? Should I include Sundays in my fasting or not? Please give reasoning for your answer, and due to the amount of non-Christian people who may answer (and the fact that I need advice from a person who has experience of being a Christian - just like I would like advice from a medically-trained person about a medical problem, I'm not being prejudiced), PLEASE STATE THAT YOU ARE CHRISTIAN if you are Christian.

if 40 straight days of fasting was good enough for jesus it should be good enough for you.

if you are worried about sundays, perhaps you should devote the entire day to prayer. the mother of a friend of mine used to do that--spend all of sunday praying.

if 40 straight days of fasting was good enough for jesus it should be good enough for you.

if you are worried about sundays, perhaps you should devote the entire day to prayer. the mother of a friend of mine used to do that--spend all of sunday praying.

Yeh, only I'm not Jesus and don't have the same abilities as Him, so it makes sense to only go so far as is reasonably possible and practical. Getting ill (or dying) from lack of food would not be good.

As for praying all Sunday, I personally think God would see that much prayer as a waste of time when I could be out seeing if anyone needs assistance with anything.

Cheers for the reply though.

having no food each day except a meal in the evening Um, since you're actually eating each day I doubt there are any medical issues to think about (since you're unlikely to make that a meal of french fries every night).
I also don't see how, since you're already eating each day, eating more than one meal on Sundays would be in any way "bad".

I recommend skip the fasting and go for self-flagellation.

Nothing says "old time religion" like self flagellation.

http://i12.tinypic.com/4fuvno6.gif

as an ex-christian i'd say you can do what you like as long as you believe in jesus as your saviour and love him. that you are asking at all suggests that you do not associate strongly with any particular sect which may have specific guidelines on what is expected of you through lent. so, yeh, do what you want, just don't damage yourself. i'd recommend waking up before dawn and having a meal then too (if i understand correctly, during ramadan muslims are required to fast during daylight hours but may eat after dark and pre-dawn is still afterdark, i'm sure jesus isn't going to smite you for doing that too).

Question. Are you Catholic?

If so, Vatican I or Vatican II?

I ask because rules of fasting vary greatly.

As a point of interst: Catholics during Vatican I were supposed to eat only fish on Fridays. Vatican II's observe this practice during Lent.

Getting ill (or dying) from lack of food would not be good.
Okay, what are you planning on eating for that nightly meal?

Because unless it's either dramatically nutrient free or consists of naught but a leaf of lettuce and three peas you're not going to get ill, much less die.

Jeez, I know people who eat only once a day because they're constantly broke, they haven't gotten ill yet and they don't think they're "fasting" either.

Um, since you're actually eating each day I doubt there are any medical issues to think about (since you're unlikely to make that a meal of french fries every night).
I also don't see how, since you're already eating each day, eating more than one meal on Sundays would be in any way "bad".

I never said there were any medical issues, but I figured it a good idea to speak to a nurse and Muslims (and a friend of mine who is a Christian).

as an ex-christian i'd say you can do what you like as long as you believe in jesus as your saviour and love him. that you are asking at all suggests that you do not associate strongly with any particular sect which may have specific guidelines on what is expected of you through lent. so, yeh, do what you want, just don't damage yourself. i'd recommend waking up before dawn and having a meal then too (if i understand correctly, during ramadan muslims are required to fast during daylight hours but may eat after dark and pre-dawn is still afterdark, i'm sure jesus isn't going to smite you for doing that too).

Thanks. You've helped me with deciding, but now my decision just had to be based on something personal which I won't explain here. I'm not gonna have a meal in the morning as well, just in the evening.

I recommend skip the fasting and go for self-flagellation.

Nothing says "old time religion" like self flagellation.

http://i12.tinypic.com/4fuvno6.gif

Erm... nah.

Question. Are you Catholic?

If so, Vatican I or Vatican II?

Catholics during Vatican I were supposed to eat only fish on Fridays. It wasn't a total ban on meat.

I'm not Catholic, but when I did some research the other day, I found some info about Roman Catholics being required to abstain from meat. I don't eat animal products anyway so that'd be no challenge.

The whole proposal is demented and unnecessary. Get a proper diet if you think you're fat.

I'm a Christian.

I would say that it is your intent in doing it that matters. If you wish to fast for the full 46 days, and you mean no disrespect in doing so (which you obviously do not), and you've checked to ensure that you won't have health problems (which you have), then do what feels right to you. The point behind Lent (in my opinion) isn't "do it just right." It is to commemorate and appreciate Christ's sacrifice by making sacrifices ourselves. If you feel the need to fast during the day for the full period of Lent, then I think you should do so.

Do be careful, however. Much like with Muslims during Ramadan, if you are planning any activities where you need to exert yourself or you begin to feel sick, you may have to snack a bit during the day.

Okay, what are you planning on eating for that nightly meal?

Because unless it's either dramatically nutrient free or consists of naught but a leaf of lettuce and three peas you're not going to get ill, much less die.

Jeez, I know people who eat only once a day because they're constantly broke, they haven't gotten ill yet and they don't think they're "fasting" either.

I never said I would get ill from one meal a day. I suggested I might get ill from eating NOTHING AT ALL for 40 (or 46) days, as Ashmoria seemed to be suggesting I should do.

I never said I would get ill from one meal a day. I suggested I might get ill from eating NOTHING AT ALL for 40 (or 46) days, as Ashmoria seemed to be suggesting I should do.Ah,I see. I read her differently, sorry.

The whole proposal is demented and unnecessary. Get a proper diet if you think you're fat.

Erm...yeh...I think I'm fat... of course... http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/6159/2038/1600/leftarm.jpg (that's my arm):rolleyes:

I'm doing it for spiritual reasons, I'm doing it in rememberance of Jesus, I'm doing it to see if I can do it, and I'm doing it because if I can manage this then it will probably help me resist temptation in the future.

*eats pizza*

Yeah, so why do this again?

I'm not Catholic, but when I did some research the other day, I found some info about Roman Catholics being required to abstain from meat. I don't eat animal products anyway so that'd be no challenge.

Here's a general (non-denominational) guideline. However you go about this, the goal is to strengthen your relationship with Jesus. You are supposed to remove all distractions from that goal during this time. That's really where your planning needs to begin and end.

Are you actively involved with a church? You might want to seek guidance from your pastor. They can help clarify or answer any questions you have about Lent. Every church sees it a bit different on how they feel this tme should be observed.

I know you aren't Catholic, but you might want to read the Pope's Lent message. It was really quite nice.

Edit: here's the link to the message (http://www.ewtn.com/library/PAPALDOC/b16lent07.HTM).

Erm...yeh...I think I'm fat... of course... http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/6159/2038/1600/leftarm.jpg (that's my arm):rolleyes:

Yeah, because it isn't like anorexics are known for having a distorted view of their own bodies or anything...

I'm doing it for spiritual reasons, I'm doing it in rememberance of Jesus, I'm doing it to see if I can do it, and I'm doing it because if I can manage this then it will probably help me resist temptation in the future.

I already did write that it was demented and unnecessary, yes.

I never said I would get ill from one meal a day. I suggested I might get ill from eating NOTHING AT ALL for 40 (or 46) days, as Ashmoria seemed to be suggesting I should do.

no i wasnt suggesting that, i was suggesting that its ok to fast on the sabbath since im pretty sure that jesus did.

Have decided to eat on Sundays for a reason which I have chosen not to broadcast. Thanks for all the replies. P.S. I'm not annorexic either. Ask anyone who's seen me eat. Being thin doesn't always mean someone is annorexic.

In Luke 5:29-32, it is recorded that Jesus was sat with sinners and was asked why. It is then recorded that Jesus replied something like "those who are well don't need a doctor". In other words, those who are not well need help. Those who are sinners need help. Remember, Jesus didn't ostracise people whom he considered to be sinners - he shared a table with them. This message is especially to those people who think it's alright to hold up "BURN FAGS BURN" type signs.

I'm a Catholic, though less practicing of late than in the past.
A few things to consider:
The no-meat-on-Fridays things was, quite seriously, imposed because the fisherman complained to the Vatican and the Church wanted people to eat more fish.

I'm fairly certain there's no such thing as a distinction between 'Vatican I' and 'Vatican II' in terms of what Catholics are supposed to do. Vatican II supercedes Vatican I. you might as well say that you're practicing the gnostic beliefs of early Christianity. You can do as you will, but then you're not really a Catholic.

Lent ends on Palm Sunday, so there are only 40 days between Ash Wednesday and Palm Sunday. The week following Palm Sunday is Easter Week, and not technically a part of Lent. Therefore, a true fast would encompass all the Sundays, but end on Palm Sunday, not Easter Sunday.
Hope that helps.

I'm a Catholic, though less practicing of late than in the past.
A few things to consider:
The no-meat-on-Fridays things was, quite seriously, imposed because the fisherman complained to the Vatican and the Church wanted people to eat more fish.

I'm fairly certain there's no such thing as a distinction between 'Vatican I' and 'Vatican II' in terms of what Catholics are supposed to do. Vatican II supercedes Vatican I. you might as well say that you're practicing the gnostic beliefs of early Christianity. You can do as you will, but then you're not really a Catholic.

Lent ends on Palm Sunday, so there are only 40 days between Ash Wednesday and Palm Sunday. The week following Palm Sunday is Easter Week, and not technically a part of Lent. Therefore, a true fast would encompass all the Sundays, but end on Palm Sunday, not Easter Sunday.
Hope that helps.

Of course Vatican II superceeds Vatican I. It doesn't mean there aren't plenty of practising Vatican I Catholics out there. Many Catholics saw Vatican II as the watering down of the Catholic Church and refuse to stop following it (Mel Gibson's father for one). There are also many many Churches that haven't totally given up all of the Vatican I teachings. Although they are now refered to as traditional.

One of the things Vatican II said was you don't have to observe the fish on friday thing. Many Vatican II Catholics still follow this practise during Lent.

I've had 8 years of catechism 6 days a week so I'm actually quite up on my Catholicism.

But it doesn't matter anyway, this guy isn't Catholic. His church might have very different ideas of how to observe this time.

1 why do you want to fast?

2 what do you think it will accomplish?

3 how will fasting accomplish this?



I don't think you should, but answer my questions and I will explain better.

Come on, eat, you know you want to. mmmmmmmmmmmmmm food. You must feel so hungry by now.... the food is good....*swallows egg roll* ;)

I'm christian. Evangelic Lutheran, to be more accurate.

I suggest you check if the Bible has any instructions for fasting, and then follow them. Anything else is stuff with which people have come up later, and therefore is wrong and/or irrelevant in relation to christianity.

Of course Vatican II superceeds Vatican I. It doesn't mean there aren't plenty of practising Vatican I Catholics out there. Many Catholics saw Vatican II as the watering down of the Catholic Church and refuse to stop following it (Mel Gibson's father for one). There are also many many Churches that haven't totally given up all of the Vatican I teachings. Although they are now refered to as traditional.

True enough, I suppose. Acknowledge, however, that whatever you may choose to do <i>in addition</i> to the Catholic Church's current doctrines is all up to you (provided you don't do something expressly forbidden by current doctrine). That being said, to be a Catholic only requires that you practice in the manner that has been presently adopted. Traditional, non-traditional, Vatican I, Vatican II - these are not denominations like Lutheran or Baptist or Anglican. 'One holy, Catholic, and apostolic Church'; right? :)

Oh, and just FYI, unless you are referring to specific denominations (which don't exist within the Catholic Church) 'church' should not be capitalized. i.e. if you are referring to specific buildings where Catholics meet and pray, etc. they are called 'churches', whereas Catholicism consists of a 'Church'.