The Monastic Pint Answers from church history on today's questions

Lenten fasting rules

What Christian writers said, from about AD 208 to 1910.

50 passages · 33 writers · 12 centuries

The short answer

Writers and councils state the Lenten fast as a yearly duty, kept by apostolic tradition, with clergy deposed or laymen excommunicated for neglecting it. The rule names what is eaten and what is given up: the Apostolic Constitutions allow only bread, salt, herbs, and water, and later writers forbid meat, eggs, milk, and cheese, with one meal taken at the ninth hour or in the evening. Writers excuse the sick, the old, children, pilgrims, and those working for God or neighbour from the Church's fasts. Churches differ on days and foods, and Augustine and Socrates point to local custom where Scripture gives no rule. Calvin calls the Papists' fasting foolish, Luther, Melanchthon, and Bullinger accept fasting but reject binding the conscience to set days and foods, and Wesley says the Church of England enjoins the forty days.

Rules of the early church and councils

19 passages · 15 writers · 200s to 1800s

Jerome, the Apostolic Constitutions, Benedict, and the councils of Laodicea and Trullo state the days, foods, and penalties of the Lenten fast.

c. 348–351 · Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures (Catecheses ad illuminandos 1-18) 4.27

And concerning food let these be your ordinances, since in regard to meats also many stumble. For some deal indifferently with things offered to idols, while others discipline themselves, but condemn those that eat: and in different ways men’s souls are defiled in the matter of meats, from ignorance of the useful reasons for eating and not eating. For we fast by abstaining from wine and flesh, not because we abhor them as abominations, but because we look for our reward; that having scorned things sensible, we may enjoy a spiritual and intellectual feast; and that having now sown in tears we may reap in joy in the world to come. Despise not therefore them that eat, and because of the weakness of their bodies partake of food: nor yet blame these who use a little wine for their stomach’s sake and their often infirmities: and neither condemn the men as sinners, nor abhor the flesh as strange food; for the Apostle knows some of this sort, when he says: forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God created to be received with thanksgiving by them that believe. In abstaining then from these things, abstain not as from things abominable, else thou hast no reward: but as being good things disregard them for the sake of the better spiritual things set before thee.

c. 370–419 · Jerome, Letters 41.3

We, according to the apostolic tradition (in which the whole world is at one with us), fast through one Lent yearly; whereas they keep three in the year as though three saviours had suffered. I do not mean, of course, that it is unlawful to fast at other times through the year—always excepting Pentecost—only that while in Lent it is a duty of obligation, at other seasons it is a matter of choice.

c. 375–380 · Anonymous (compiler of the Apostolic Constitutions), The Apostolic Canons (85) 69

If any bishop, presbyter, or deacon, or reader, or singer, does not fast the holy Quadragesimal fast of Easter, or the fourth day, or the day of Preparation, let him be deposed, unless he be hindered by some bodily infirmity. If he be a layman, let him be excommunicated.

1866 · Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, Vol. 3: Nicene and Post-Nicene Christianity, A.D. 311-600 7.75

The Western church, on the contrary, especially the Roman, in protest against Judaism, observed the seventh day of the week as a fast day, like Friday. This difference between the two churches was permanently fixed by the fifty-fifth canon of the Trullan council of 692: “In Rome fasting is practised on all the Saturdays of Quadragesima [the forty days’ fast before Easter]. This is contrary to the sixty-sixth apostolic canon, and must no longer be done. Whoever does it, if a clergyman, shall be deposed; if a layman, excommunicated.”

Medieval Catholic rules

10 passages · 3 writers · 1200s to 1900s

Thomas Aquinas explains why the Church forbids flesh, eggs, and milk, why the meal falls at the ninth hour, and who keeps which fasts.

1265–1273 · Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica II-II, q. 147, a. 8, ad 3

Reply to Objection 3: Eggs and milk foods are forbidden to those who fast, for as much as they originate from animals that provide us with flesh: wherefore the prohibition of flesh meat takes precedence of the prohibition of eggs and milk foods. Again the Lenten fast is the most solemn of all, both because it is kept in imitation of Christ, and because it disposes us to celebrate devoutly the mysteries of our redemption. For this reason the eating of flesh meat is forbidden in every fast, while the Lenten fast lays a general prohibition even on eggs and milk foods. As to the use of the latter things in other fasts the custom varies among different people, and each person is bound to conform to that custom which is in vogue with those among whom he is dwelling. Hence Jerome says [*Augustine, De Lib. Arb. iii, 18; cf. De Nat. et Grat. lxvii]: "Let each province keep to its own practice, and look upon the commands of the elders as though they were the laws of the apostles."

1265–1273 · Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica II-II, q. 147, a. 8, co.

I answer that, As stated above (A[6]), fasting was instituted by the Church in order to bridle the concupiscences of the flesh, which regard pleasures of touch in connection with food and sex. Wherefore the Church forbade those who fast to partake of those foods which both afford most pleasure to the palate, and besides are a very great incentive to lust. Such are the flesh of animals that take their rest on the earth, and of those that breathe the air and their products, such as milk from those that walk on the earth, and eggs from birds.

Who is bound or excused

8 passages · 7 writers · 500s to 1900s

Aquinas, Francis de Sales, Gregory the Great, Law, Luther, and Catherine of Siena say who must fast and who may be excused.

1265–1273 · Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica II-II, q. 147, a. 4, ad 3

Reply to Objection 3: Apparently a distinction should be made with regard to pilgrims and working people. For if the pilgrimage or laborious work can be conveniently deferred or lessened without detriment to the bodily health and such external conditions as are necessary for the upkeep of bodily or spiritual life, there is no reason for omitting the fasts of the Church. But if one be under the necessity of starting on the pilgrimage at once, and of making long stages, or of doing much work, either for one's bodily livelihood, or for some need of the spiritual life, and it be impossible at the same time to keep the fasts of the Church, one is not bound to fast: because in ordering fasts the Church would not seem to have intended to prevent other pious and more necessary undertakings. Nevertheless, in such cases one ought seemingly, to seek the superior's dispensation; except perhaps when the above course is recognized by custom, since when superiors are silent they would seem to consent. Reply to Objection 4: Those poor who can provide themselves with sufficient for one meal are not excused, on account of poverty, from keeping the fasts of the Church. On the other hand, those would seem to be exempt who beg their food piecemeal, since they are unable at any one time to have a sufficiency of food.

1608 · Francis de Sales, Introduction to the Devout Life 3.23

If your work is necessary or profitable to God’s Glory, I would rather see you bear the exhaustion of work than of fasting. Such is the mind of the Church, who dispenses those who are called to work for God or their neighbour even from her prescribed fasts. One man finds it hard to fast, another finds it as hard to attend the sick, to visit prisons, to hear confessions, preach, minister to the afflicted, pray, and the like. And the last hardship is better than the other; for while it subdues the flesh equally, it brings forth better fruit.

Reformation and later writers

13 passages · 11 writers · 1500s to 1800s

Calvin criticizes the Papists' rule of fasting, Luther, Melanchthon, and Bullinger set limits on prescribed fasts, and Wesley says the Church of England enjoins the forty days.

1561 · John Calvin, Commentary on Daniel, part 2 (chapters 7-12) lect53

We should notice, however, how foolishly and absurdly fasting is observed in these days among the Papists, who think they have discharged that duty by eating but once in the day, and abstaining from flesh. The rule of fasting among the Papists is, to avoid flesh and not to partake of either supper or dinner. But real fasting requires something far different from this, namely, perfect abstinence from all delicacies.

1566 · Heinrich Bullinger, The Second Helvetic Confession 24

Now, as concerning the choice of meats, we suppose that, in fasting, all things should be denied to the flesh whereby the flesh is made more lusty, wherein it does most immoderately delight, and whereby it is most of all pampered, whether they be fish, spices, dainties, or excellent wines. Otherwise we know that all the creatures of God were made for the use and service of men. All things which God made are good (Genesis 1:31), and are to be used in the fear of God, and with due moderation, without putting any difference between them.

1872 · John Wesley, Sermons on Several Occasions 25

Once, at least, “on all Fridays in the year?” (So our Church clearly and peremptorily enjoins all her members to do; to observe all these as well as the vigils and the forty days of Lent, as days of fasting or abstinence.)

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.