Fasting = one meal per day?

[joasia]

I see this thread a bit late. Well, the normative fast is indeed one meal a day after 3 PM as the sources mentioned here states it. Since it is normative, nobody should ask a permission from his spiritual father (high word to talk in fact about the priest who confesses you or that who knows you best) to fast in this way, just as nobody asks permission to fast from meat and dairy, it is the norm.

The fact is that most persons do not know this rule because simply they were not taught about it. I discovered it myself by accident and noticed it was genuine and general. Is that rule hard, impossible to follow physically? According to Saint Gergory Palamas no, and he's right, for several reasons.

If you have one meal a day at noon, you'll be hungry in the evening, but if you have it at 3 PM, you won't in fact. So the hour of 3 PM looks physically good, it is by the way, the hour of lunch in Spain. Before, nothing forbids you from drinking (juice if you need energy because they contain sugar, water etc); since it is not a total abstention of water. Practically speaking, a solution would be those working, eating something at work at 3PM like fruits and so on (bananas work very well), and finish your meal at home when you are back. From experience of several persons, it is really feasible, physically speaking.

Jean-Serge, if you can maintain this rule of fasting, then I admire your strength. But, I cannot. You are right....it's not physically impossible. So what else is involved? Our spiritual state determines our abilities. Everyone is going through their own spiritual struggles/crisis. But, as I mentioned, it's also a tool. If we try to use a tool beyond our capabilities (spiritually) then it can do more damage. This is a very delicate matter. God is very aware of our struggles.

And the fact is that the spiritual conduct of each individual is based on their relationship to God. Yes, the rule is that we cut out oil during the week. I use oil because that is the spiritual struggle I am going through.

Our goal is theosis. And those who have attained it were able to follow this fasting rule because they were in communion with God. It was natural to them. But, we who struggle have certain levels of tolerance. It's a work in progress. And let's say that a person follows the strict fast...that person should be shining with the Holy Spirit, right? But, why is it that people who are so strict with this fast don't shine with the glow of the Holy Spirit? There must be something more to it than just abstaining from certain food. There must be something more going on within themselves, on the spiritual level.

If you feel frustrated by seeing people not doing as much as you do, then just remember that the journey, for them, is not at an end. You are just seeing them at a point in time of their lives. And pray for them.

Yes, I agree. We should follow the rules of fasting of the Church holy fathers. They are our guidance to reaching theosis. But, I just want to remind you again about the fact that not everyone is on the same level. I remember reading the life of St. Gregory of Nyssa and at one point I thought...wow, he doesn't get it. But, then eventually, he became a saint. So, everyone has a turning point and that is what gives me hope... because it's possible that one day I can reach theosis. So basically, I'm saying, there's more to fasting than just the food. But, we shouldn't disrespect the fasting rules either. Just let's keep it balanced.

[Jean-Serge]

The fact is not to talk about my ascetic works (that concerns nobody) and are ridiculous, or to shame person who cannot manage to do this, but to remember that if we are at different level, there is a goal that is not to be forgotten, deification indeed, and that fasting is a tool for it... So I just say indeed that the ideal way defined was the one meal a day after 3 PM, and that we should try to reach the ideal, the same for example someone who was new to fasting progressively managed to get rid of meat, dairy products, fish and so on.After all, if the Fathers defined this rule, it must be because it is the best spiritual medication.

Another purely physiological point is that the human body has in fact a great capacity of resistance (even if you are not in the Navy Seals) that we often underestimate, and that is probably unknwon to us because we seldom knew hunger. Another point is mental and mind also in human being, in some situation it is the mind that keeps you afloat. If someone think , that something is impossible for him and that he will NEVER manage to do it or will never try seriously, it will be so. But if he has a more positive thinking, he may try, retry and finally succeed.A bit for those non professional sportsmen that run a marathon, at one point, you continue thanks to your mind (not your body because you are exhausted) and once this critical step is passed and the end is near (some kilometers), strength is back, physically also. In the orthodox case, in addition to the strong-will mind (humour), we also have God's grace that helps our effort (sinergy), so we are not alone.

[jgress]

I think what concerns me is that a recent convert might read this and conclude that he should do whatever the books say and not what his spiritual father says because "one doesn't need a blessing to keep the general rule". Given how harsh the general rules are, this is a recipe for spiritual disaster to someone unaccustomed to them. I would recommend that, if you come across one of these rules and think you should follow it, ask your spiritual father about it first and do what he says.

[Maria]

I think what concerns me is that a recent convert might read this and conclude that he should do whatever the books say and not what his spiritual father says because "one doesn't need a blessing to keep the general rule". Given how harsh the general rules are, this is a recipe for spiritual disaster to someone unaccustomed to them. I would recommend that, if you come across one of these rules and think you should follow it, ask your spiritual father about it first and do what he says.

I agree. If we are truly spiritual sons and daughters, then we will humbly confide and ask advice of our spiritual fathers regarding our prayer life, which includes how we fast. To do otherwise, is to invite prelest.

[jgress]

Yes. I'm a pretty bookish sort myself, so the big discrepancy between what I read about Orthodox praxis and what I actually witnessed was a major stumbling-block. I often felt the authors must inhabit some parallel universe where people actually do the things they say they do. It's better to learn from the beginning that what you read needs to be taken with a grain of salt, and that at least when it comes to ascetic practice, the safest path is to discuss everything with your spiritual father and don't try to add anything to your prayer or fasting without his blessing.

[Hieromonk Enoch]

Strict Fasting includes both the kind of food eaten (no meat, dairy, animal produces, fat, oil, etc), and the time in which a meal is taken, after the Ninth Hour, or sometimes after Vespers.

Although the Liturgy of the Pre-Sanctified Gifts is mostly served on Wednesdays and Fridays in Lent, as well as Holy Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday (and on the Thursday of the Great Canon), it was once served on all the weekdays of Great Lent, excepting Annunciation. Canon 52 of the Council of Trullo states:

"On all days of the holy fast of Lent, except on the Sabbath, the Lord's Day, and the holy day of the Annunciation, the Liturgy of the Presanctified is to be served." (Canon 52)

Since Pre-Sanctified Liturgy is combined with Vespers, to take Holy Communion on these days, of necessity, you would not only be fasting from meat, dairy, oil, etc, but, you would not be eating anything until after the service was over. That is, let us, sometime after 5 or 6pm.

This is why, in some places, you see the Pre-Sanctified Liturgy served actually in the morning, to cut the fasting time down.

In fact, the English word "noon", which we usually take to mean mid-day, or clock 12pm, relates to this. "Noon", etymologically, comes from the word "None", which is from the Latin "Nona", which means "Ninth Hour" (clock 3pm). As time went on, especially in the later Middle Ages, especially in English speaking nations, clergy and laity began to dislike having to fast strictly all day in order to take Holy Communion, so, services were moved up to the mid-day, with Vespers following, etc.

The strictest of fasting where food is allowed is that of xerophagy, which often mean only bread and water, and after a period of time. The same Synod of Trullo, quoted above, took issue with the Orthodox Roman practice of that day, in which, on Saturdays (Sabbaths) other than Holy Saturday, in this case in Lent, there was the obligatory practice to practice xerophagy (bread and water, or, uncooked vegetables, dry foods) on Saturdays in Lent, and this only after the Ninth Hour (or later). Of course, this practice was technically contrary to the Apostolic Canon 66 so drew censure.

Of course, if someone has diabetes, hypoglycemia, is pregnant (especially if they are pregnant, as the Canons/Questions of St. Nikephorus the Patriarch in the very back of the Pedalion exempt Pregnant women from fasting, because, paraphrasing St. Nikephorus, "The purpose of fasting is to humble the body. And their body is already humbled."), etc, then, this is something different.

There are many things that used to be done, that should still technically be done, but, are not done. This, however, does not mean there should not be encouragement, both from a personal level, as well as a general exhortation, to return to the 'stricter' practice.
Canon 50 of Laodicea states that xerophaia should be the standard throughout Lent:
"That in the last week of Great Lent Thursday ought not to be broken, and the whole Lent be dishonoured; but, on the contrary, throughout the period of Lent person ought to fast by confining themselves to xerophagia."

It seems few, if any, are going to enforce strict xerophagy (bread and water) on all the days of Lent, whether they are allowed to eat it in the morning or the evening!

For example, St. Nikodemus lists things that aren't done any more, but, were once very common. It used to be the rule that during Cheese Week, only Pre-Sanctified Liturgies were once to be served. (Pedalion, pg. 572, Note 1, beginning "Note, however, that according...") These practices falling out of place due to the incursion of the heathens, etc. Or St. Nikephorus having to answer questions about whether a Fast should be kept in August or September:

Question 3: Must we keep the fast of August?

Answer: The fast of August used to be earlier, but afterwards it was shifted in order to avoid its coinciding with fasts of heathen which the latter observe during this season. Yet even nowadays many persons keep this fast.

This is the little talked about Fast of two weeks leading up to Exaltation. Which now seems only to be optional, at best.

IN Christ,

Fr. Enoch

[jgress]

The fast of August was earlier? I don't see how it could have been earlier given that it begins on August 1.