Fast
fast
Abstinence from refreshment; complete abstinence from food or drink observed by Catholics before receiving the Eucharist . The law of fasting is a Catholic disciplinary regulation, authorizing the taking of only one complete meal in a day, in addition to a small quantity of food or drink in the morning and evening. The black fast was a fast in which not only flesh meat but milk, cheese, butter, or eggs were forbidden. The fast prescribed for the worthy reception of the Holy Eucharist is the total abstinence from food and drink from midnight. Midnight may be reckoned by any accepted time, legal, natural, or regional. Nothing having the nature of food or drink is permitted which is taken after the manner of eating or drinking, i.e., introduced into the mouth from without after midnight and swallowed. Whatever is digestible, strictly speaking, has the nature of food or drink, yet the matter partly depends on the common estimation of men. A small amount, if inhaled or accidentally swallowed as mixed with saliva, does not break the fast. The law of fasting does not hold for communion received in the probable danger of death or to save the Sacrament from irreverence. It is relaxed for the sick .
Fuente: New Catholic Dictionary
Fast
In general abstinence from food or drink, a term common to the various Teutonic tongues. Some derive the word from a root whose primary signification means to hold, to keep, to observe or to restrain one’s self. The Latin term jejunium denotes an animal intestine which is always empty. Such abstinence varies according to the measure of restriction circumscribing the use of food and drink. Hence it may denote abstinence from all kinds of food and drink for a given period. Such is the nature of the fast prescribed by the Church before Holy Communion (natural fast). It may also mean such abstinence from food and drink as is dictated by the bodily or mental dispositions peculiar to each individual, and is then known as moral or philosophical fast. In like manner the term comprehends penitential practices common to various religious communities in the Church. Finally, in the strict acceptation of the term, fasting denotes abstinence from food, and as such is an act of temperance finding its raison d’être in the dictates of natural law and its full perfection in the requirements of positive ecclesiastical legislation.
In Christian antiquity the Eustathians (Sozomen, Hist. Eccl. II, 33) denied the obligation, for the more perfect Christians, of the Church fasts; they were condemned (380) by the Synod of Gangra (can. xiv) which also asserted incidentally the traditional antiquity of the ecclesiastical fasts (Hefele-Leclercq, Hist. des Conciles. French tr. Paris, 1908, 1, p. 1041). Contrary to the groundless assertions of these sectaries, moralists are one in maintaining that a natural law inculcates the necessity of fasting because every rational creature is bound to labour intelligently for the subjugation of concupiscence. As a consequence, rational creatures are logically obliged to adopt means commensurate with the attainment of this end (see MORTIFICATION). Amongst the means naturally subserving this purpose fasting lays claim to a place of primary importance. The function of positive law is to intervene in designating days whereon this obligation must be observed, as well as the manner in which the same obligation is to be discharged on days authoritatively appointed.
What pertains to the origin as well as to the historical development of this obligation in the Church may be gleaned easily from the articles on ABSTINENCE and BLACK FAST. The law of fasting, ecclesiastical in its genius, is unwritten in its origin, and consequently must be understood and applied with due regard for the customs of various times and places. See the corresponding historico-archaeological articles in the various modern dictionaries and encyclopedias of Christian Archaeology, e.g. Martigny, Kraus, Smith and Cheetham, Cabrol and Leclercq. Details will be found under ADVENT; LENT; VIGIL; EMBER DAYS.
In the United States of America all the days of Lent; the Fridays of Advent (generally); the Ember Days; the vigils of Christmas and Pentecost, as well as those (14 Aug.) of the Assumption; (31 Oct.) of All Saints, are now fasting days. In Great Britain, Ireland, Australia and Canada, the days just indicated, together with the Wednesdays of Advent and (28 June) the vigil of Saints Peter and Paul, are fasting days. Fasting essentially consists in eating but one full meal in twenty-four hours and that about midday. It also implies the obligation of abstaining from flesh meat during the same period, unless legitimate authority grants permission to eat meat. The quantity of food allowed at this meal has never been made the subject of positive legislation. Whosoever therefore eats a hearty or sumptuous meal in order to bear the burden of fasting satisfies the obligation of fasting. Any excess during the meal mitigates against the virtue of temperance, without jeopardizing the obligation of fasting.
According to general usage, noon is the proper time for this meal. For good reasons this hour may be legitimately anticipated. Grievous sin is not committed even though this meal is taken a full hour before noon without sufficient reason, because the substance of fasting, which consists in taking but one full meal a day, is not imperiled. In like manner, the hour for the midday meal and the collation, may for good reasons be conscientiously inverted. In many of our larger cities this practice now prevails. According to D’Annibale (Summa Theologiae Moralis, 4 ed. III, 134) and Noldin (Summa Theologiae Moralis, n. 674) good reasons justify one in taking a collation in the morning, dinner at noon, and the morning allowance in the evening, because the substance of fasting still remains intact. Nothing like a noteworthy interruption should he admitted during the course of the midday meal, because such a break virtually forms two meals instead of one. Common sense, taking into consideration individual intention and the duration of the interruption, must finally determine whether a given interruption is noteworthy or not. Ordinarily an interruption of one half hour is considered slight. Nevertheless, an individual, after having commenced the midday meal and meeting with a bonafide interruption lasting for an hour or more is fully justified in resuming and finishing the meal after the termination of an interruption. Finally, unless special reasons suggest the contrary, it is not allowed to give immoderate length to the time of this meal. Ordinarily, a duration of more than two hours is considered immoderate in this matter.
Besides a complete meal, the Church now permits a collation usually taken in the evening. In considering this point proper allowance must be made for what custom has introduced regarding both the quantity and the quality of viands allowed at this repast. In the first place, about eight ounces of food are permitted at the collation even though this amount of food would fully satisfy the appetites of some persons. Moreover, the attention must be paid to each person’s temperament, duties, length of fast, etc. Hence, much more food is allowed in cold than in warm climates, more to those working during the day than to those at ease, more to the weak and hungry than to the strong and well fed. As a general rule whatever is deemed necessary in order to enable people to give proper attention to their duties may be taken at the collation. Moreover, since custom first introduced the collation, the usage of each country must be considered in determining the quality of viands permitted thereat. In some places eggs, milk, butter, cheese and fish are prohibited, while bread, cake, fruit, herbs and vegetables are allowed. In other places, milk, eggs, cheese, butter and fish are permitted, owing either to custom or to Indult. This is the case in the United States. However, in order to form judgments perfectly safe concerning this point, the Lenten regulations of each diocese should be carefully read. Finally, a little tea, coffee, chocolate or such like beverage together with a morsel of bread or a cracker is now allowed in the morning. Strictly speaking, whatever may be classified under the head of liquids may be taken as drink or medicine at any time of the day or night on fasting days. Hence, water, lemonade, soda, water, ginger ale, wine, beer and similar drinks may be taken on fasting days outside meal time even though such beverages may, to some extent, prove nutritious. Coffee, tea, diluted chocolate, electuaries made of sugar, juniper berries, and citron may be taken on fasting days, outside meal time, as medicine by those who find them conducive to health. Honey, milk, soup, broth, oil or anything else having the nature of food, is not allowed under either of the two categories already specified. It is impossible to decide mathematically how much food is necessary to involve a serious violation of this law. Moralists as well as canonists concur in holding that an excess of four ounces would seriously militate against the obligation of fasting, whether that much food was consumed at once or at various intervals during the day because Alexander VII (18 March, 1666) condemned the teaching of those who claimed that food so taken was not to be regarded as equalling or exceeding the amount allowed (Denzinger, Enchiridion Symbolorum et Definitionum, tenth ed. Freiburg im Br., 1908, No. 1129).
Though Benedict XIV (Constitutions, Non Ambiginius, 31 May, 1741; in superna, 22 Aug. 1741) granted permission to eat meat on fasting days, he distinctly prohibited the use of fish and flesh at the same meal on all fasting days during the year as well as on Sundays during Lent. (Letter to the Archbishop of Compostella, 10 June, 1745, in Bucceroni Enchiridion Morale No. 147). This prohibition binds all exempted from fasting either because they are compelled to labour or because they are not twenty-one years old. Furthermore this prohibition extends to those allowed meat on fasting days either by dispensation or by Indult. Sin is Committed each time the prohibited action takes place.
The ecclesiatical law of fasting embodies a serious obligation on all baptized individuals capable of assuming obligations provided they have completed their twenty-first year and are not otherwise excused. This doctrine is merely a practical application of a universally accepted principle of moralists and canonists whereby the character of obligation in human legislation is deemed serious or light in so far as the material element, involved in the law bears or does not bear a close and intimate relation to the attainment of a prescribed end. Inasmuch as fasting considered as a function of the virtue of temperance bears such a relation to the promotion of man’s spiritual well-being (see Lenten Preface in the Roman Missal), it certainly embodies an obligation generally serious. To this a priori reason may be added what Church history unfolds concerning the grave penalties attached to transgressions of this law. The sixty-ninth of the Apostolic Canons decrees the degradation of bishops, priests, deacons, lectors or chanters failing to fast during Lent, and the excommunication of laymen, who fail in this way. The fifty-sixth canon of the Trullan Synod (692) contains similar regulations. Finally Alexander VII (24 Sept., 1665) condemned a proposition formulated in the following terms: Whoso violates the ecclesiastical law of fasting to which he is bound does not sin mortally unless he acts through contempt or disobedience (Denzinger, op. cit., no. 1123). Though this obligation is generally serious, not every infraction of the law is mortally sinful. Whenever transgressions of the law fail to do substantial violence to the law, venial sins are committed. Inability to keep the law of fasting and incompatibility of fasting with the duties of one’s state in life suffice by their very nature, to extinguish the obligation because as often as the obligation of positive laws proves extremely burdensome or irksome the obligation is forthwith lifted. Hence, the sick, the infirm, convalescents, delicate women, persons sixty years old and over, families whose members cannot have the necessaries for a full meal at the same time, or who have nothing but bread, vegetables or such like viands, those to whom fasting brings loss of sleep or severe headaches, wives whose fasting incurs their husband’s indignation, children whose fasting arouses parent’s wrath; in a word, all those who can not comply with the obligation of fasting without undergoing more than ordinary hardship are excused on account of their inability to fulfil the obligation. In like manner unusual fatigue or bodily weakness experienced in discharging one duty and superinduced by fasting lifts the obligation of fasting. However, not every sort of labour, but only such as is hard and protracted excuses from the obligation of fasting. These two conditions are not confined to manual labour, but may be equally verified with regard to brain work. Hence bookkeepers, stenographers, telegraph operators, legal advisers and many others whose occupations are largely mental are entitled to exemption on this score, quite as well as day-labourers or tradesmen. When these causes begetting exemption by their very nature, do not exist, lawfully constituted superiors may dispense their subjects from the obligation of fasting. Accordingly the Sovereign Pontiff may always and everywhere grant valid dispensations from this obligation. His dispensations will be licit when sufficient reasons underlie the grant. In particular cases and for good reasons, bishops may grant dispensations in their respective dioceses. Unless empowered by Indult they are not at liberty to dispense all their subjects simultaneously. It is to be noted that usually bishops issue just before Lent circulars or pastorals, which are read to the faithful or otherwise made public, and in which they make known, on the authority of the Apostolic See, the actual status of obligahon, dispensations, etc. Priests charged with the care of souls may dispense individuals for good reason. Superiors of religious communities may dispense individual members of their respective communities provided sufficient reasons exist. Confessors are not qualified to grant these dispensations unless they have been explicitly delegated thereunto. They may, however, decide whether sufficient reason exists to lift the obligation.
Those who have permission from the Holy See to eat meat on prohibited days, may avail themselves of this concession at their full meal, not only on days of abstinence but also on fasting days. When age, infirmity or labour releases Christians from fasting, they are at liberty to to eat meat as often as they are justified in taking food, provided the use of meat is allowed by a general indult of their bishop (Sacred Penitentiaria, 16 Jan., 1834). Finally, the Holy See has repeatedly declared that the use of lard allowed by Indult comprehends butter or the fat of any animal.
No student of ecclesiatical discipline can fail to perceive that the obligation of fasting is rarely observed in its integrity nowadays. Conscious of the conditions of our age, the Church is ever shaping the requirements of this obligation to meet the best interests of her children. At the same time no measure of leniency in this respect can eliminate the natural and divine positive law imposing mortification and penance on man on account of sin and its consequences. (Council of Trent, Sess. VI. can. xx)
———————————–
J.D. O’ NEILL Transcribed by Joseph P. Thomas
The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume VCopyright © 1909 by Robert Appleton CompanyOnline Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. KnightNihil Obstat, May 1, 1909. Remy Lafort, CensorImprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York
Fuente: Catholic Encyclopedia
Fast
(properly, , tsum, strictly, to keep the mouth shut; , strictly, not to eat). In the early ages of the world, when the spontaneous productions of nature and the spoils of the chase formed man’s chief aliment, fasting from time to time was compulsory, in consequence of the uncertainty of obtaining food when wanted. It would be easy for superstitious ignorance to interpret this compulsion into an expression of the divine will, and so to sanction the observance of fasting as a religious duty. The transition would be the easier at a time and in countries when the office of physician was united in the same person with that of priest; for in hot climates occasional abstinence is not without its advantages on the health; and an abstinence which the state of the body required, but which the appetite shunned or refused, the authority of the priest and the sanctions of religion would exact at once with ease and certainty. In the earlier stages of civilization no idea is more prevalent and operative than that the Deity is propitiated by voluntary sufferings on the part of his’ creatures. Hence ensued all kinds of bodily mortifications, and even the sacrifice of life itself. Nay, “the fruit of the body” the dear pledges of mutual affection, the best earthly gift from the heavenly Father children, were sacrificed in expiation of “the sin of the soul.” Human enjoyments were held to be displeasing in the sight of God. The notion that the gods were jealous of man’s happiness runs through the entire texture of Greek and Roman mythology; and the development of this falsehood, as presented in Greek tragedy, has given birth to some of the finest productions of the human mind. But what more pleasurable than food to man, especially to the semi-barbarian? The denial of such a pleasure must then be well-pleasing to the Divinity, the rather because, on occasions of family bereavement, of national disaster, or any great calamity, the appetite is naturally affected under the influence of grief, and is made to loathe the food which in its ordinary condition it finds most grateful.
A connection between sorrow and fasting would thus be established which would carry with it a sort of divine siaction in being natural and inevitable in its origin. Accordingly, abstinence, which seemed imposed by Providence, if not in expiation of guilt, yet as an accompaniment of sorrow, easily became regarded as a religious duty when voluntarily prolonged or assumed, and grew to be considered as an efficacious means for appeasing the divine wrath, and restoring prosperity and peace. “Climate, the habits of a people, and their creed, gave it at different periods different characteristics; but it may be pronounced to have been a recognized institution with all the more civilized nations, especially those of Asia, throughout all historic times. We findd it in high estimation among the ancient Parsees of Irania. It formed a prominent feature in the ceremonies of the mysteries of Mithras; and found its way, together with these, over Armenia, Cappadocia, Pontus, and Asia Minor, to Palestine, and northward to the wilds of Scythia. The ancient Chinese and Hindus, and principally the latter, in accordance with their primeval view which they held in conmmon with the Parsees of heaven and hell, salvation and damnation, of the transmigration of the soul, and of the body as the temporary prison of a fallen spirit, carried fasting to an unnatural excess. Although the Vedas attach little importance to the excrumciation of the body, yet the Pavaka, by the due observance of which the Hindu believer is purified from all his sins, requires, among other things, an uninterrupted fast for the space of twelve days.
Egypt seems to have had few or no compulsory general fasts; but it is established beyond doubt that for the initiation into the mysteries of His and Osiris, temporary abstinence was rigorously enforced. In Siam, all solems acts are preceded by a period of fasting, the seasons of the new and full moon being especially consecrated to this rite. In Java, where abstinence from the flesh of oxen is part of the religion of all, Buddhists and emorshippers of Brahma alike, the manner and times of the observance vary according to the religion of the individual. Again, in Tibet, the Dalailamaites and Bogdolamaites hold this law in common. That Greece observed and gave a high place to occasional fast-days such as the third day of the festival of the Eleusinian mysteries, and that, for instance, those who came to consult the oracle of Trophonius had to abstain from food for twenty-four hours is well known. It need hardly be added that the Romans did not omit so important an element of the festivals and ceremonies which they adopted from their neighbors, though with them the periods of fasting were of less frequent recurrence” (Chambers, Encyclopedia, s.v.). The Mohammedans fast (till sunset) during the, whole of their ninth (lunar) month Ramadan (see D’Herbelot, Bibl. Or. s.v.). (On this religious observance among pagan nations, consult Meiners, Gesch. der Relig. 2:139; Lakemacher, Antiq. Grcec. Sacr. page 626; Wachsmuth, Hellen. Alterthum. 2:237; Bottiger, Kunstmythol. 1:132.) SEE ASCETICISM.
I. Jewish Fasting. The word (, junium) is not found in the Pentateuch, but it often occurs in the historical books and the prophets (2Sa 12:16; 1Ki 21:9-12; Ezr 8:21; Psa 69:10; Isa 58:5; Joe 1:14; Joe 2:15; Zec 8:19, etc.). In the law the only term used to denote the religious oaservance of fasting is the more significant one, ). ( ; affligeae animam), “affflicting the soul” (Lev 16:29-31; Lev 23:27; Num 30:13). The word , i.e., affliction, which occurs Ezr 9:5, where it is rendered in A.V. “heaviness,” is commonly used to denote fasting is the Talmuda, and is the title of one of its treatises.
The sacrifice of the personal will, which gives to fasting all its value, is expressed in the old term used in the law, afflicting the soul. The faithful son of Israel realized the blessing of “chastening his soul with fasting” (Psa 69:10). But the frequent admonitions and stern denunciations of the prophets may show us how prone the Jews were in their formal fasts to lose the idea of a spiritual discipline, and to regard them as being in themselves a means of winning favoifroma God, or, in a still worse spirit, to make a parade of them in order to appear religious before seen (Isa 58:3; Zec 7:5-6; Mal 3:14; comp. Mat 6:16).
The Jewish fasts were observed with various degrees of strictness. Sometimes there was entire abstinence frona food (Est 4:16, etc.). On other occasions there appears to have been only a restriction to a very plain diet (Dan 10:3). Rules are given in the Talmud (both in Yoma sand Taanith) as to the mode in which fasting is to be observed on particular occasions, The fast of the day, according to Josephus (Ant. 3:10, 3), Was considered to terminate at sunset, and St. Jerome speaks of the fasting Jew as anxiously waiting for the rising of the stars. Fasts were not observed on the sabbaths, the new maoons, the great festivals, or the feasts of Purim and Dedication (Jdt 8:6; Taanith, 2:10).
Those who fasted frequently dressed in sackcloth or rent their clothes, put ashes on their head and went barefoot (1Ki 21:27; comp. Josepheus, Ant. 8:13, 8; Neh 9:1; Psa 35:13). The rabbinical directions for the ceremonies to be observed in public fasts, and the prayers to be used in theam, may be seen in Taanith, 2:1-4 (see the Cod. Talm. “Taanith,” c. verss. et notis De Lundii, Traj. ad Rh. 1694, 8vo). Consult also Maimonides, Jod Ha-Chezeka, Hilchoth Taunioth, 1:315 sq.; Lightfoot, Horae Hebraic on Luk 18:12; Schottgen, Horae Hebraicae on Luk 18:12 Reland, Antiquitates Sacrae Veteruin Hebraorum (1717), page 538 sq.; Bloch, in Geiger’s Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift fur judische Theol. 4:205 sq.; Fink, in Ersch und Grasber’s Encyklopadie, s.v. Fasten; Jost, Gesch. des Judenthums und seiner Secten (Leipzig, 1857), 1:184 sq.; Bauer, Gottesd. Verf. 1:348 sq.; Otho, Lex. Rabb. page 233 sq.
1. The sole fast required by Moses was on the great day of annual atonement. This observance seems alvays to have retained some prominence as “the fast” (Act 27:9). But what the observance of the enjoined duty involved we are nowhere expressly informed, and can approximate to a knowledge of precise details only so far as later practices among the Jews may be considered as affording a faithful picture of this divinely-sanctioned ordinance. In these remarks the opinion is implied that “the fast,” whatever importance it may have subsequently acquired, was originally only an incident, not to say an accident, in the great solemnity of the annual atonement. SEE ATONEMENT, DAY OF.
There is no mention of any other periodical fast in the O.T. except in Zec 7:1-7; Zec 8:19. From these passages it appears that the Jews, during their captivity, observed four annual fasts in the fourth, fifth, seventh, aelnd tenth months. When the building of the second Temple had commenced, those who remained in Babylon sent a message to the priests at Jerusalem to inquire whether the observance of the fast in the fifth month should not be discontinued. The prophet takes the occasion to rebuke the Jews for the spirit in which they had observed the fast of the seventh emonth as well as that of the fifth (Zec 7:5-6); and afterwards (Zec 8:19), giving the subject an evangelical turn, he declares that the whole of the four fasts shall be turned to “joys and gladness, and cheerful feasts.” Zechariah simply distinguishes the fasts by the months in which they were observed; but the Mishna (Taanith, 4:6) and St. Jerome (in Zechariah 8) give statements of certain historical events which they were intended to commemorate:
(1.) The fast of the fourth month. Kept on the 17th of Tamnmuz, to commemorate the making of the golden calf by the Jews, the breaking of the tables of the law by Moses (Exodus 24; comp. 33:3), the failure of the daily sacrifice for emant of cattle during the siege, and the storming of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar (Jeremiah 52).
(2.) The fast of the fifth month. Kept on the 9th of Ab, to commemorate the decree that those who had left Egypt should not enter Canaan (Num 14:27, etc.); the Temple burnt by Nebuchadnezzar. and again by Titus; and the ploughing up of the site of the Temple, with the capture of Bether, in which a vast number of Jews from Jerusalem had taken refuge in the time of Hadrian (comp. Jost, Gesch. d. Israeliten, 3:240).
(3.) The fast of the seventh month. Commemorating the complete sack of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, and the death of Gedaliah (2 Kings 25), on the 3d of Tisri (comp. Sedera Olam Rabba, c. 26).
(4.) The fast of the tenth month. On the 10th of Tebeth, to commemorate the receiving by Ezekiel and the other captives in Babylon of the news of the destructian of Jerusalem (Eze 33:21; compare 2Ki 25:1).
These four fasts have been Christianized, and tradition tells us that their transfer into the Christian Church was made by the Roman bishop Callistus (flour. A.D. 223). To deprive them, however, of their Jewish appearance, the whole year was divided into four seasons (quatnor tempora), and a fast was appointed for one week of each season (compare Herzog, Encyklopadie, 3:336).
(5.) The fast of Esther. Additional to the above; kept on the 13th of Adar (Est 4:16). SEE ESTHER (FAST OF).
Some other events mentioned in the Mishna are omitted as unimportant. Of those here stated several could have had nothing to do with the fasts in the time of the prophet. It would seem most probable, from the mode in which he has grouped them together, that the original purpose of all four was to commemorate the circumstances connected with the commencement of the captivity, and that the other events were subsequently associated with them on the ground of some real or fancied coincidence of the time of occurrence. As regards the fast of the fifth month, at least, it can hardly be doubted that the captive Jews applied it exclusively to the destruction of the Temple, and that St. Jerome was right in regarding as the reason of their request to be released from its observance the fact that it had no longer any purpose after the new Temple was begun. As this fast (as well as the three others) is still retained in the Jewish calendar, we must infer either that the priests did not agree with the Babylonian Jews, or that the fast, having been discontinued for a time, was renewed after the destruction of the Temple by Titus.
The number of annual fasts in the present Jewish calendar has been multiplied to twenty-eight, a list of which is given by Reland (Antiq. page 274). SEE CALENDAR.
2. Public fasts were occasionally proclaimed to express national humiliation on account of sin or misfortune, and to supplicate divine favor in regard to some great undertaking or threatened danger. In the case of public danger, the proclamation appears to have been accompanied with the blowing of trumpets (Joe 2:1-15; comp. Taanith, 1:6). The following instances are recorded of strictly national fasts: Samuel gathered “all Israel” to Mizpeh and proclaimed a fast, performing at the same time what seems to have been a rite symbolical of purification, when the people confessed their sin in having worshipped Baalimn and Ashtaroth (1Sa 7:6); Jehoshaphat appointed one “throughout all Judah” when he was preparing for war against Moab and Ammon (2Ch 20:3); in the reign of Jehoiakim, one was proclaimed for “all the people in Jerusalem, and all who came thither out of the cities of Judah,” when the prophecy of Jeremiah was publicly read by Baruch (Jer 36:6-10; comp. Bar 1:5); three days after the feast of Tabernacles, when the second Temple was completed, “the children of Israel assembled with fasting, and with sackclothes and earth upon them,” to hear the law read, and to confess their sins (Neh 9:1). There are references to general fasts in the prophets (Joe 1:14; Joe 2:15; Isaiah 58), and two are noticed in the books, of the Maccabees (1Ma 3:46-47; 2Ma 13:10-12).
There are a considerable number of instances of cities and bodies of men observing fasts on occasions in which they were especially concerned. In the days of Phinehas, the grandson of Aaron, when the men of Judah had been defeated by those of Benjamin, they fasted in making preparation for another battle (Jdg 20:26). David and his men fasted for a day on account of the death of Saul (2Sa 1:12), and the men of Jabesh Gilead fasted seven days on Saul’s burial (1Sa 31:13). Jezebel, in the name of Ahab, appointed a fast for the inhabitants of Jezreel, to render more striking, as it would seem, the punishment about to be inflicted on Naboth (1Ki 21:9-12). Ezra proclaimed a fast for his companions at the river of Ahava, when he was seeking for God’s help and guidance in the work he was about to undertake (Ezr 8:21-23). Esther, when she was going to intercede with Ahasuerus, commanded the Jews of Shushan neither to eat nor drink for three days (Est 4:16). A fast of great strictness is recorded in the Scriptures as having been proclaimed by the heathen king of Nineveh to avert the destruction threatened by Jehovah (Jon 2:5-9).
Public fasts expressly on account of unseasonable weather and of famine may perhaps be traced in the first and second chapters of Joel. In later times they assumed great importance, and form the main subject of the treatise Taanith in the Mishna. The Sanhedrim ordered general fasts when the nation was threatened with any great evil, such as drought or famine (Josephus, Life, 56; Taanith, 1:5), as was usual with the Romans in their supplications (Livy, 3:7; 10:23).
3. Private occasional fasts are recognised in one passage of the law (Num 30:13). The instances given of individuals fasting under the influence of grief, vexation, or anxiety are numerous (1Sa 1:7; 1Sa 20:34; 2Sa 3:35; 2Sa 12:16; 1Ki 21:27; Ezr 10:6; Neh 1:4; Dan 10:3). The fasts of forty days of Moses (Exo 24:18; Exo 34:28; Deu 9:18) and of Elijah (1Ki 19:8) are, of course, to be regarded as special acts of spiritual discipline, faint though wonderful shadows of that fast in the wilder ness of Judaea, in which all true fasting finds its mean ing (Mat 4:1-2). After the exile private fasts became verya frequert (Lightfoot, p. 318), awaiting the call of no special occasion, but entering as a regular part of the current religious worship (Sueton. Aug. 76; Tacit. Hist. 5:4, 3). In Jdt 8:6 we read that Judith fasted all the days of her widowhood, “save the eves of the sabbaths, and the sabbaths, and the eves of the new moons, and the new moons, and the feasts and the solemn days of the house of Israel.” In Tobit 12 prayer is declared to be good with fasting; see also Luk 2:37; Mat 9:14. The parable of the Pharisee and Publican (Luk 18:9; comp. Mat 9:14) shows how much the Pharisees were given to voluntary and private fasts, “I fast twice a week.” The first was on the fifth day of the week, on which Moses ascended to the top of Mount Sinai; the second was on the second day, on which he came down (Taanith, 2:9; Hieros. Mlegillah, 75, 1). This bi-weekly fasting has also been adopted in the Christian Church; but Monday and Thursday were changed to Wednesday and Friday (feria quarta et sexta), as commemorative of the betrayal and crucifixion of Christ. Of a similar semi-occasional character was the First-born sons’ fast ( ), on the day precedrng the feast of Passover, in commemoration of the fact that while God on that occasion smote all the first-born of the Egyptians, he spared those of the house of Israel (comp. Exo 12:29, etc.; Sopherim, 21:3). SEE FIRST-BORN.
The Essenes and the Therapeutae also were much given to such observances (Philo, Vit. Contenmpl. page 613; Euseb. Prop. Evan. 9:3). Fasts were considered a useful exercise in preparing the mind for special religious impressions; as in Dan 10:2 sq. (see also Act 13:3; Act 14:23). From Mat 17:21 : “Howbeit this kind (of demons) goeth not out but by prayer and fasting,” it would appear that the practice under consideration was considered in the days of Christ to act in certain special cases as an exorcism.
Fasting (as stated above) was accompanied by the ordinary signs of grief among the Israelites, as may be seen in 1Ma 3:47. The abstinence was either partial or total. In the case of the latter food was entirely foregone, but this ordinarily took place only in fasts of short duration; and abstinence from food in Eastern climes is more easy and less detrimental (if not in some cases positively useful) than keeping from food would be with us in these cold, damp Northern regions (Est 4:16). In the case of partial abstinence the time was longer, the denial in degree less. When Daniel (10: 2) was ” mourning three full weeks,” he ate no “pleasant bread, neither came flesh nor wine in his mouth.” There does not appear to have been any fixed and recognized periods during which these fasts endured. From one day to forty days fasts were observed. The latter period appears to have been regarded with feelings of peculiar sanctity, owing, doubtless, to the above instances in Jewish history. There are monographs, entitled De jejuniis Hebraeorum, by Opitz (Kil. 1680), Peringer (Holm. 1684), and Lund (Aboae, 1696).
II. In New Testament. We have already seen how qualified the sanction was which Moses gave to the observance of fasting as a religious duty. In the same spirit which actuated him, the prophets bore testimony against the lamentable abuses to which the practice was turned in the lapse of time and with the increase of social corruption (Isa 58:4 sq.; Jer 14:12; Zec 7:5). Continuing the same species of influence and perfecting that spirituality in religion which Moses began, our Lord rebuked the Pharisees sternly for their outward and hypocritical pretences in the fasts which they observed (Mat 6:16 sq.), and actually abstained from appointing any fast whatever as a part of his own religion. In Mat 9:14, the question of the reason of this avoidance is expressly put, Whydo we (the disciples of John) and the Pharisees fast oft, but thy disciples fast not?” The answer shows the voluntary character of fasting in the Christian Church, “Can the children of the bridechamber fast?”
It is true that a period is alluded to when these children “shall fast;” but the general scope of the passage, taken in connection with the fact that Christ’s disciples fasted not, and with the other fact, that while John (Mat 11:18-19) “came neither eating nor drinking,” the Son of man “came eating and drinking,” clearly shows that our Lord, as he did not positively enjoin religious fasting, so by the assertion that a time would come when, being deprived of the (personal presence of the) bridegroom, his disciples would fast, meant to intimate the approach of a period of general mourning, and employed the term “fast” derivatively to signify rather sorrow of mind than any corporeal self-denial (Neander, Leben Jesu, pages 231, 305). In his sermon on the mount, however (Mat 6:17), while correcting the self-righteous austerity of Pharisaic fasting, he clearly allows the practice itself, but leaves the frequency, extent, and occasion of its performance to the private conscience and circumstances of each individual. That the early Christians observed the ordinary fasts which the public practice of their day sanctioned is clear from more than one passage in the New-Testament Scriptures (Act 13:2; Act 14:23; 2Co 6:5); but in this they probably did nothing more than yield obedience, as in general they thought themselves bound to do, to the law of their fathers so long as the Mosaic institutions remained entire. Although the great body of the Christian Church held themselves free from all ritual and ceremonial observances when God in his providence had brought Judaism to a termination in the rasure of the holy city and the closing of the Temple, yet the practice of fasting thus originated might easily and unobservedly have been transmitted from year to year and from age to age, and that the rather because so large a portion of the disciples being Jews (to say nothing of the influence of the Ebionites in the primitive Church), thousands must have been accustomed to fasting from the earliest days of their existence, either in their own practice, or the practice of their fathers, relatives, and associates (comp. Corinthians 7:5). SEE FASTING.
Literature. Ciacconius, De jejuniis apud antiquos (Romans 1599); Tiegenhorn, Descriptio jejuniorum (Jen. 1607); Drexel, Dejrjunio (Antw. 1637); Dalleus, De jejuniis et Quadragesima (Dauentr. 1654); Ortlob, De ritu jejuniorum (Viteb. 1656); Lochner, De jejunio contra pontificios (Rost. 1656); Launoy, De ciborum delectu in jejuniis (Par. 1663); Funke, Dejejuniis (Altenb. 1663); Nicolai, Dejejunio Christiano (Par. 1667); Sommer, De jejuniorum natura (Jen. 1670); Sagittarius, De jejuniis veterum (Jen. 1672); Varenius, Jejunium Christianorum (Rost. 1684); Salden, De jejuniis (in Otia theol. [Amst. 1684], page 658 sq.); Thomasin, Traite des jeunes (Paris, 1690); Hooper, Discourse concerning Lent (Lond. 1696); Ortlob, De jejunio Mosis quadragesim Tali (Lips. 1701); Andry, Le regime de careme (Par. 1710); Pfanner, De jejuniis Christianor. (in Obss. sacr. 2:324-520); Mabillen, Jeune de l’Ep’phanie (in (Euvresposth. 1:431 sq.); Hildebrand, De jejunio (Helmst. 1719); Bohmer, De jure cira jejunantes (Hal. 1722); Schutz, De quat. temporum jejuniis (Wemig. 1723); Volland, De jejuniis Sabbaticis (Rost. 1724); Muratori, De quat. temporuns jejuniis (in Anecd. 2:246 sq.); Bernhold, De jejunio partiali (Altd. 1725); Walchf De jejunio quadragesimali (Jena, 1727); Bernhold, De jejunio spirituali (Altorf. 1736); Carpzov, Dejejuniis Sabbaticis (Rost. 1741); Seelen, De jejuniis Sabbaticis (Rost. 1741-2); Becker, De jejuniis vett. Christianorum (Leucop. 1742); Ehrlich, De Quadragesimae jejunio (Lips. 1744); Kiesling, De xerophagia ap. Judeos et Christianos (Lips. 1746); Seidel, De Hieronymo, jejunii suasore (Lond. 1747); Schickedanz, De jejunio Sabbatico (Servest. 1768); Karner, Jejunium Christo propasitum (Lips. 1776); Anon. Gesch. den Fastenaustalten (Vien. 1787); Anon. Apologie dujeune (Par. and Genev. 1790); Van Falekenhausen, Ueb. d. 40thg. Fisitengebet (Augsburg, 1809); Brauan, Verth. d. Fastens (AVien. 1830); Morin, Jeune chez les anciens (in Mim. da l’Acad. des Inscr. 4:29 sq.). On fasting in the Christian Church, SEE FASTING.
Fuente: Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature
Fast
The sole fast required by the law of Moses was that of the great Day of Atonement (q.v.), Lev. 23:26-32. It is called “the fast” (Acts 27:9).
The only other mention of a periodical fast in the Old Testament is in Zech. 7:1-7; 8:19, from which it appears that during their captivity the Jews observed four annual fasts.
(1.) The fast of the fourth month, kept on the seventeenth day of Tammuz, the anniversary of the capture of Jerusalem by the Chaldeans; to commemorate also the incident recorded Ex. 32:19. (Comp. Jer. 52:6, 7.)
(2.) The fast of the fifth month, kept on the ninth of Ab (comp. Num. 14:27), to commemorate the burning of the city and temple (Jer. 52:12, 13).
(3.) The fast of the seventh month, kept on the third of Tisri (comp. 2 Kings 25), the anniversary of the murder of Gedaliah (Jer. 41:1, 2).
(4.) The fast of the tenth month (comp. Jer. 52:4; Ezek. 33:21; 2 Kings 25:1), to commemorate the beginning of the siege of the holy city by Nebuchadnezzar.
There was in addition to these the fast appointed by Esther (4:16).
Public national fasts on account of sin or to supplicate divine favour were sometimes held. (1.) 1 Sam. 7:6; (2.) 2 Chr. 20:3; (3.) Jer. 36:6-10; (4.) Neh. 9:1.
There were also local fasts. (1.) Judg. 20:26; (2.) 2 Sam. 1:12; (3.) 1 Sam. 31:13; (4.) 1 Kings 21:9-12; (5.) Ezra 8:21-23: (6.) Jonah 3:5-9.
There are many instances of private occasional fasting (1 Sam. 1:7: 20:34; 2 Sam. 3:35; 12:16; 1 Kings 21:27; Ezra 10:6; Neh. 1:4; Dan. 10:2, 3). Moses fasted forty days (Ex. 24:18; 34:28), and so also did Elijah (1 Kings 19:8). Our Lord fasted forty days in the wilderness (Matt. 4:2).
In the lapse of time the practice of fasting was lamentably abused (Isa. 58:4; Jer. 14:12; Zech. 7:5). Our Lord rebuked the PhariSee s for their hypocritical pretences in fasting (Matt. 6:16). He himself appointed no fast. The early Christians, however, observed the ordinary fasts according to the law of their fathers (Acts 13:3; 14:23; 2 Cor. 6:5).
Fuente: Easton’s Bible Dictionary
Fast
See Fasting
Fuente: The Poor Mans Concordance and Dictionary to the Sacred Scriptures
Fast
Isa 58:6 (a) The description given in this passage reveals that true fasting is not necessarily abstaining from food. The abstaining from food in itself evidently has little, if any, value in GOD’s sight. It is the leaving of the duty of preparing and eating the meal, so that there may be time for serving others, for prayer for others, and for enriching the soul from GOD’s Word. Several hours a day are consumed in preparing and eating meals. That time may well be used once in a while for more profitable service and devotion. From five to seven hours a day are consumed in preparing meals, eating them, and in cleaning up after them. Fasting eliminates the loss of that time, so that the person may devote himself fully to the things of GOD, both for his own blessing, and the blessing of others. (See Mat 6:17; Mar 2:19; Luk 18:12; Act 13:2).