Why Fish is Not Considered Meat by Catholics

For Catholics, Lent is a time of fasting and sacrifice leading up to Easter. A major part of Lenten sacrifice is abstaining from eating meat on Fridays. However, fish is allowed as an alternative. This exemption for fish has led many to ask – why is fish not considered meat by Catholics? As a Catholic myself, I have pondered this question and done some research into the history and reasoning behind it.

The Origin of Meat Abstinence

The tradition of abstaining from meat on Fridays and Lent goes back centuries in the Catholic church. In the early days of Christianity fasting was much more strict – people often ate only bread and water. Over time, the rules relaxed to allow fish eggs and dairy products. By the 13th century, the practice of abstaining from land animal flesh on Fridays was firmly established.

The purpose was twofold – to honor Christ’s sacrifice on the cross every Friday, and to practice self-discipline and simplicity during Lent. Meat was considered decadent, so avoiding it was a way to be humble and restrain earthly appetites. Fish, on the other hand, was more widely available and considered a simpler food.

Why Fish Doesn’t Count as Meat

According to Catholic teaching, meat comes only from animals such as chickens, cows, sheep or pigs – all mammals and birds. Fish and other seafood don’t count as meat, probably because they were seen as a less indulgent option in earlier times.

There are a few reasons why fish may have been classified separately:

• Fish was plentiful: For Catholics living near water, fish was a dietary staple and more widely available than red meat.

• Cold-blooded animals Fish are cold-blooded whereas mammals and birds are warm-blooded. This biological distinction may have lead early religious scholars to put them in separate categories

• No blood: Red meat from warmblooded land animals contains blood, whereas fish flesh does not. Blood was seen as special and sacred.

• Less pleasurable: Philosophers like St. Thomas Aquinas argued that the flesh of land animals was tastier and more pleasurable than fish, so should be avoided.

• Less lustful: Some believed that meat produced lustful humors in the body more than fish. Fasting was meant to curb desires of the flesh.

So while the reasoning may seem arbitrary today, there was an attempt at the time to categorize animals based on theological and philosophical principles. Fish seemed to fit fasting objectives in a way that meat did not.

Exceptions and Contradictions

Clearly defining meat versus non-meat has not always been straightforward in Catholic dietary rules. Some examples of contradictions include:

• Beavers were classified as fish by some in the 17th century.

• Capybaras (giant rodents) are allowed as fish in parts of Latin America.

• Alligator was declared a fish by a Louisiana archbishop, allowing Lenten consumption.

• Muskrat and frog legs have also controversially been deemed acceptable Lenten fare in some North American regions.

So the designation of fish as allowed but meat as forbidden is blurry, even within Catholicism. Many modern Catholics even view the meat-fish distinction as arbitrary. But the tradition remains ingrained in religious practice.

Looking at the Reasoning Critically

While the fish exemption made sense in the context of history and Catholic philosophy, we can also critique the reasoning from today’s perspective:

• Biologically, fish are clearly animals, not a separate category from birds and mammals. All are complex vertebrate organisms.

• Neither fish nor meat is inherently sinful or immoral to eat. So abstention is more a practice of self-discipline than anything objectively bad.

• In today’s world of factory farming and global food transit, fish is no longer clearly a simpler, more widely available food than meat.

• The rationale around blood, humors and desires seems outdated when we understand human biology better today.

So the reasoning used by medieval Catholic theologians can seem irrational or weak in the modern context. But we can still understand it as relevant in its historical framework and theological aims. The tradition remains for cultural identity more than logical consistency.

Fish Means More than Meat Today

For today’s Catholics, abstaining from meat while allowing fish on Fridays has become more of a cultural identity and practice of faith than a logical dictum. It is a tradition that connects Catholics across generations and around the world. The reasoning may require some suspended disbelief, but people often continue cultural food practices for their communal meaning more than rational justifications.

In the end, the Catholic distinction between meat and fish for religious fasting remains one filled with historical context, contradictions, exceptions and changing significance over time. The simple answer is that fish is exempt from meat because the Catholic church declares it so based on long-standing traditions and identity. The complex answer reveals how religious dietary rules cannot always be neatly explained by science and logic alone.