Do Lutherans Fast?
Do Lutherans fast before receiving the Holy Eucharist? I think I know of a handful who do - mostly pastors. But do the rest of us fast, especially we who name ourselves confessional? I am just wondering how commonplace the practice is among us. This time of year there is a lot of talk on Lutheran blogs on when, what, where, why, and how to fast during Advent/Lent. There is not so much talk about fasting as an on-going practice, as repetitious as a pulse. Perhaps it is just as valid a topic.
Comments
When I was Lutheran I was studying with several women in the congregation and we got to the subject of fasting. We read the section on fasting from Richard Foster's book, Celebration of Discipline. And one gal brought in some information from Bill Bright on fasting. But I wanted to understand fasting from a Lutheran perspective. The best material I found was Father Fenton's on Zion's website. That was several years ago and it was the first time I had ever heard of Zion Detroit. I remember being so excited to find it and I sent it on to everyone of my girlfriends saying...here's how Lutherans do it!
So Father Fenton's Lutheran grandparents did more teaching than I suspect they realized. :D
Since I have been a Lutheran, I have let this discipline go entirely. At first I kept it up, but such fasting is supposed to be an ecclesial discipline, not an individual effort. Fasting is an act of worship, and therefore we fast with the Church, with the worshiping community. As much as I believed that the Church oughtto be fasting as a community, in reality it was only something that I was doing because I chose to do so. It is a contradiction.
In my experience as a Lutheran, fasting of any kind -- pre-Eucharistic, weekly, Lenten -- has never been mentioned from the pulpit, discussed in Bible study, nor discussed in one-on-one pastoral counseling. Fasting is never recommended nor taught as a salutary discipline, and no practical guidance has ever been given as to how to go about it.
This is, of course, consistent with the fact that spiritual discipline of any kind at all is never discussed or recommended in the Lutheran Church. Of course it is expected that you will come to Church and that you really should read your Bible and pray at home. But that is about it. There is no discussion of a specific rule of prayer; no expectation (as discussed) of any sort of fasting; and certainly no expectation of making a regular confession, since private confession is not even available in most congregations.
I don't think this is a good situation.
I don't think of it as a purely "personal" choice, since my church's catechism praises it, but does not over-praise it as though fasting itself were not an outward training but truly made me worthy to receive Him whom no one can worthily receive. Faith clings to the "for you" - and the "for you" is spoken in tender divine love also to those who haven't fasted.
It's the Didache.
8:1 And let not your fastings be with the hypocrites, for they fast on the second and the fifth day of the week; 8:2 but do ye keep your fast on the fourth and on the preparation (the sixth) day. Source
It hadn't occured to me that fasting is ecclesial. Thanks for pointing that out. (Although now that has perhaps raised more questions in my mind.)
We cannot be little christs apart from the Christ; we cannot have the little church of our home apart from the Church of Christ.
We are called to do the Right we are called to do, whether my spouse, minister, congregation, or ecclesial or denominational body concurs. It is possible for them to err and it is possible for me to err. Discernment is required, and difficult. God help us all and save us!
I was Orthodox for ten years. For the Orthodox, everything is ecclesial. One may perhaps be lost by oneself, but one cannot be saved by oneself.
Extra ecclesiam nulla salus; and as Fr Georges Florovsky pointedly added, propter ecclesia ipsa salus est.
(Eventually these people stopped paying me, so I stopped writing. I'm still waiting for a few checks.)
https://www.lcms.org/graphics/assets/media/WRHC/004_12%20Good%20Reasons%20to%20Go%20Hungry.PDF
1. Fasting expands your compassion for the hungry by making you experience hunger.
2. You should fast when you have a personal or professional crisis.
3. Fasting can help you live longer.
4. Fasting helps others by saving the money you would have spent on food and giving it to the poor.
5. Fasting makes time for reading the Bible and praying.
6. Fasting is good for "spiritual renewal, increased insight, deeper commitment and clarity of life purpose".
7. “Man does not live by bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of
the Lord.” - "Ultimately, meaning, satisfaction and fulfillment in life result from a healthy
relationship with God through Jesus Christ."
8. Fasting gives you more "physical and mental energy" for prayer.
9. Fasting makes you appreciate eating.
10. Fasting makes you more loving and less judgemental.
11. Fasting is an antedote for a "soft" life.
12. Jesus and His apostles fasted, so we should also fast to follow Him.
12 Good Reasons to Go Hungry (???)
These seem more like 12 results (if you may call it that) of fasting and not reasons to fast. Should living longer be listed as a reason to fast?! Or should the appreciation of eating be listed as a reason to fast?? Only in two points did this list mention Christ (and not on a very deep level - unless you count "fasting seemed like a good idea to Jesus and His apostles..." as a deep understanding). No wonder most Lutherans don't fast before the Eucharist. Fasting doesn't seem to have much to do with Christ other than that He did it and we should do it too. I'm very disappointed in this publication from the Synod.
4. Fasting helps others by saving the money you would have spent on food and giving it to the poor.
5. Fasting makes time for reading the Bible and praying.
7. “Man does not live by bread alone but on every word that comes from the mouth of
the Lord.” - "Ultimately, meaning, satisfaction and fulfillment in life result from a healthy
relationship with God through Jesus Christ."
9. Fasting makes you appreciate eating.
10. Fasting makes you more loving and less judgemental.
11. Fasting is an antidote for a "soft" life.
12. Jesus and His apostles fasted, so we should also fast to follow Him.
I'm not sure what you mean by saying the LCMS document discusses only the results of fasting. I think of fasting only in terms of what it will result in, it isn't an end in itself. I might be misunderstanding your point, though.
Orthodox talk about fasting so much and in so many ways in so many different places and contexts that it is difficult to find a single place that pulls it all together - and Orthodoxy is the only place I ever really learned anything about fasting, so...
Bishop Kallistos Ware discusses the true nature of the Lenten fast here:
http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article9199.asp
Fr. Tom Hopko discusses it here:
http://www.oca.org/OCchapter.asp?SID=2&ID=199
My point is not to say that fasting is an end in itself or even to disagree that fasting does those things on the list.
I would say that the reason to fast is to imitate Christ and then all of these things - food tasting better, being more loving, ect. - will be added to you. It seemed to me that any person could look at that list and decide they want to be like number 11 - more loving. There are other easier ways perhaps to go about doing that rather than the self-deprivation of fasting. So why fast? I didn't think their list got down to the real heart of the reason for fasting.
But maybe I'm wrong. Should you think of what the fast will result in before fasting? Is the result the reason to fast? (I'm genuinely asking.)
I am by no means an expert on any of this. I am willing to take correction from you, my dear readers, as a dove in your hand.
I thought the article was similar to Robert Foster’s and Bill Bright’s writings--a lot more oriented to the individual rather than to the Church as a whole. Perhaps a better way to go would be to read St. John Chyrsostom on fasting or some of the other fathers? I think their writings are less likely to confound the issue and less likely to evoke that sense of “what’s in it for me” from a more worldly perspective (longer life, better health, more physical and mental energy, etc.)
As I mentioned earlier, some years ago I embraced what I learned from the information posted on the Zion Detroit's website. Regarding fasting before reception Father Fenton wrote in an article called, “The Church’s Fast”:
In addition, communicants prepare for Holy Communion by not eating anything (a strict fast) after Supper on Saturday evening until receiving the Blessed Sacrament on Sunday. (In other words, Sunday breakfast is to be eaten after Mass; hence, the popular Sunday brunches.) This habit reminds the communing Christian that the Lord's Supper is the most important meal for body and soul—more important even than breakfast.
The most important meal for body and soul, indeed!
St. John Chrysostom said, “Fasting is a medicine. But like all medicines, though it be very profitable to the person who knows how to use it, it frequently becomes useless (and even harmful) in the hands of him who is unskillful in its use.”
So we are talking about powerful and potent medicine here and not something to be viewed lightly. And conversely…it would seem to be a medicine we can scarcely afford to do without.
Fasting is a tool to an end. The fact that Christ and the Apostles did it is a sign pointing in the direction of a benefit. We don't wear sandals because they did because there is no spiritual benefit attached to imitating this part of their lives; Christ didn't say that certain demons would not come out except by prayer and sandals. So, the this means is shown to have spiritual ends. Other ends have been experienced through the experience of great saints that have fasted and result in the more 'spiritual' points in the LCMS document, in Church history and in Orthodoxy.
There are benefits beyond the easily enunciated, but they can really only be discovered by experience, personally. I will say that the most important result of fasting as an Orthodox Christian was that it saved my faith. After all, faith is something intellectual, yes, but it is something that is assumed in the actions we take. Holding on to external 'habits' is a way to exercise faith when or intellect has been assaulted, when our understanding has been shaken, when we have been cut to the quick - and yet we fast on Wednesdays and Fridays because this is what the Church has always done, thus keeping us in the Church, imitating the Apostles and thus united with them as we do what they did.
Chris Jones and all,
Chris, your comment has been eating at me a bit:
"Since I have been a Lutheran, I have let this discipline go entirely. At first I kept it up, but such fasting is supposed to be an ecclesial discipline, not an individual effort. Fasting is an act of worship, and therefore we fast with the Church, with the worshiping community. As much as I believed that the Church ought to be fasting as a community, in reality it was only something that I was doing because I chose to do so. It is a contradiction."
I completely follow the logic, that fasting is eccesial and should be done WITH the Church. Is there really no benefit of fasting when the Church is not fasting? In the Orthodox or Catholic Church is a person restricted from fasting at any time unless the Church herself is fasting? If not, then there must be some benefit for the individual effort, for the faithful who fast IN the Church.
I have been wondering if I too should give up on fasting since the mighty whole of the LCMS does not fast before Communion, thus making my own fasting a "contradiction". But that thought is somehow depressing so I think I will hold to the hope that there is also an individual benefit.
Whatever we do is between God and us. There is no need for anyone, besides one's spiritual father/mother, to know what ascetic exercises one is taking on. St. Herman of Alaska wore chains under his robes that no one discovered until after his death.
When I wrote "It is a contradiction" I certainly did not mean to imply anything about what is right or spiritually beneficial for anyone but myself. I have no call to give spiritual direction to anyone, however obliquely.
The "contradiction" that I spoke of was a personal one: I was transferring a spiritual discipline I had learned and practiced in my former communion into my new communion. In Orthodoxy, fasting definitely has the ecclesial character that I spoke of, but in Lutheranism it simply does not have that character. Even if I continued the practice, it really is not the same thing, because it becomes an individual effort.
I have been wondering if I too should give up on fasting ...
I certainly hope that my difficulties, which come out of my own rather odd denominational history, would not affect your practice one way or the other. Please don't take my complaints as any sort of spiritual advice.
Thanks for replying.
I did not take your earlier comment as spiritual advice that I ought to follow - and I know it was not your intent that it should be taken as such - but it did cause me to think a little deeper about my own position (which is not a bad thing and in fact I thank you for it). As Christopher pointed out, a person's ascetic practice is between oneself and God and one's spiritual Father. Believe me, my own Father has been kept abreast of this conversation and he has shared his own thoughts on the matter with me. From him I take spiritual advice.
But to probe your thoughts a little further - It seems to me that you see fasting within Orthodoxy as something completely different from fasting within Lutheranism (with the main difference being the eccesiastical nature). Holding to the belief of the one, you do not fast as the other. Do I understand your position correctly? I am not trying to call into question your position (as you said, it is spiritually beneficial to you, and who am I to challenge that?), just trying to understand where you're coming from. If what I have said is not a fair summary, please correct me.
Yours in Christ.