bearing blog: Fasting food.

Now that I'm home with three small children, and homeschooling, I don't prepare sitdown meals called "breakfast" and "lunch." We generally eat snack-size meals all day long, a pattern I got into when I was nursing my firstborn. It's typical for me to start the day with one egg and lots of black coffee, then have a piece of cheese about ten o'clock, then maybe a can of tuna and some crackers or celery between noon and one, then a cup of tea and something else around three-thirty. The 18-mo baby eats when I eat. Meanwhile, the 4yo and 7yo get some toast or oatmeal whenever they wake up, a sandwich or a bowl of soup whenever chores are done, cookies at tea-time, and all the fruit and baby carrots and pickles and cheese and glasses of milk that they feel like fetching for themselves out of the fridge.

(Some homeschoolers swear by the beauty of sitting down for breakfast and lunch with the whole family who's at home, blessing the food, and taking the time to connect peacefully in the middle of the day. I swear by never having anyone eat anything during the day that takes me more than five minutes to make or clean up.)

It works really well for us. But I admit to having some trouble two days a year: Good Friday and Ash Wednesday. Jimmy Akin sums up the situation in one of his "Annual Lent Fight" posts (the rest of the Annual Lent Fight posts are here):

The law of fast allows the eating of one full meal plus two smaller meals, provided the two smaller- meals are not as large as a regular meal if combined. This law, of course, is hopelessly confusing as many people tend not to eat similarly-sized meals.

Count me among the hopelessly confused. Yes, yes, yes, common sense and all that. But (a) I am not good at common sense when I am hungry and (b) I am really prone to rationalizing and being aware of rationalizing. If you could look into my head over the course of Ash Wednesday it would go something like this:

is it time for a smaller meal yet
is it time for a smaller meal yet
is it time for a smaller meal yet
oh goody it is time for a smaller meal!
let's see must not let this one and the next one add up to a regular meal
how about a single egg?
but I usually eat a single egg at this time of the day
that's not any different from usual
hmm maybe i ought to have less than a single egg
but wait, if i have a single egg now and a couple of pieces of toast later, that won't add up to a "regular size meal." should be okay
but i am a nursing mother and i'm going to be hungry. nursing mothers are exempt. it ought to be enough just not snacking between meals.
but i'm not nursing all that much. the exemption isn't really meant for me.
this can't be that difficult. common sense.
i know i'm not supposed to have snacks between meals. fine.
so if I have an egg and some toast now, and something small later, and then dinner, I should be good.
but wait! an egg and some toast now is more than i usually eat at this time of day! I'm just trying to rationalize eating enough now so I won't feel hungry. feeling hungry, i.e., suffering a bit under obedience, is the whole point of this exercise.
forget it. I won't eat anything. that's the only way to be sure.
that's crazy. why hold myself to stricter standards than the church seems to think i need to? after all, i have duties to my family today, and there's no way i can do them properly if i don't eat something. i'm pretty sure the point is to eat less than usual, so you can feel it, but not so little that you can't carry out your duties. i'll just have some toast.
wait, shouldn't i eat something better for me? maybe I should eat a veggie omelet.
or maybe I ought to eat just some plain toast specifically because it's not as good for me as the veggie omelet. after all the point is to deny oneself. it's a fast, not a health food diet.
but i'll enjoy the toast more. i will experience more suffering by eating the veggie omelet.
argh! can't think. I'll eat the egg and toast now and then I'll be able to think what I should do.

Then I eat, and then a couple of hours later the same thing happens, and then at dinner time I do what Rich Leonardi laments he does and scarf down everything I see, and then I look back at the day and I realize I ate the same number of calories I usually do. Maybe more. The only thing different was (a) the calories were distributed a little differently throughout the day and (b) I spent the whole day thinking about food.

I can't help but think there's something wrong with this.

The comments thread in Rich's post that I linked above made me think that I'd actually have an easier time -- a hungrier time, but a mentally-easier time -- if I just went without food on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday. At least instead of those two smaller meals. Maybe I'd be better off with one meal and nothing but liquids to keep up my strength in between. Even caloric liquids traditionally don't count as breaking your fast, and I should be safe from the wild mood swings of rationalization/scrupulosity problem there as long as I don't actually get out the blender.

I know there are some who would look at all this and say, "Do you really think that God cares what you eat?" I suppose especially to Protestants, the confusions in my mind, the overindulgences Rich reports at the end of the day, are proof that our laws of abstinence and fasting are so much legalistic vanity. Where's Christ in all this?

Yet. Obedience for the sake of obedience has meaning. Accepting suffering for the sake of obedience is following His example, and two days a year isn't really that much to ask. Ten days later and on a full stomach I can see that I have a real fear of suffering even a little bit (at least when it comes to food) and it really clouds my mind, so that rational thinking flies out the window and emotions rule me.

I guess it's time to fact the truth: I'm not capable of using "common sense" to figure out a fast day as I go along. The Church's rule, however it's worded in terms of "meals," logically implies Eat Less Than 2/3 of Your Daily Diet, and do it in no more than three sittings. If I can't achieve that without sitting down the day before and pre-planning every bite that will go into my mouth and at what time of day --- well, then that's what I have to do. If I'm to be obedient, I'll have to admit to myself and to others when I'm weak and illogical. I'll have to admit when I have no common sense.

Thanks to Rich for explaining his own fasting troubles and getting me thinking more clearly about this.

Comments

You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

A friend from Nicaragua said that their fast was no solid food all day (maybe one meal? Don't remember) but you could drink broth and such to keep strength up.

I do run into the "But am I really nursing enough to be excused?" thoughts.

Posted by: mandamum | 16 February 2008 at 09:50 PM