Fish Fridays?

[beautyon]

My friend, who's Jewish, told me that Judaism draws the same distinction between flesh (uh, land meat?) and fish. So it comes from that, as rufiokicks pointed out.

[Farsight one]

What I've been told by professors is that, like others have said, fish was a poor man's food way back when. That was ALL they could afford. Not even bread was a plausible aquisition. So, to ban meat all together (which would include fish) would force the poor to simply not eat at all. Rather than have people starve to death, they allowed fish and it has simply stayed that way ever since.

[MichaelFilo]

Lets get more specific, would do people living next to a sea eat?!?! Fish. What was their mainstay, fish and bread, and wine. Thats what it came across as when Jesus multiplied the loaves. Meat is a luxury item, and so is proper to abstain from, while fish is more (or was more) a staple food.

Figure it this way, the Church could change it as it pleases.

God bless,
Mikey

[MC IMaGiNaZUN]

quote=AngelofJesus,Apr 12 2006, 08:33 PM]
Yeah, you can even eat the fish raw while your catching it. Just a little wassaaabi and some soy sauce. mmmhmmm...
[right][snapback]945572[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
so much for self-mortification.

Thanks for the answer. Peasant food, that makes sense.

I guess we could always go get a Po'Boy sandwhich.

Now that Lent is over... Wheres MY MEAT!!! ALLELUIA!!!


SHALOM

[OLAM Dad]

[quote name='Farsight one' date='Apr 17 2006, 07:53 PM']What I've been told by professors is that, like others have said, fish was a poor man's food way back when.  That was ALL they could afford.  Not even bread was a plausible aquisition.  So, to ban meat all together (which would include fish) would force the poor to simply not eat at all.  Rather than have people starve to death, they allowed fish and it has simply stayed that way ever since.
[right][snapback]951423[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Sounds to me like they should change from allowing only fish to allowing only pork skins.