Non-Lent dietary rules / guidelines for lay people

[Irene]

Dear List Members,

For quite some time I have been trying to find out information about non-Lenten dietary rules for Orthodox Christians.

As a young convert I was told there were certain meats that we are not supposed to eat - <u>ever</u> . However, I do not know who told me this, although it was probably my ex-in-laws and they have generations of Priests in the family to this day.

I can not find anything written about it on the internet and I have no idea whether these are correct or not.

This is what I have believed is correct for the last 20 years:

We do not eat shark meat or any other creature that could possibly have killed and eaten a human being. We eat only animals/birds/fish that are naturally vegetarian for example cows, sheep - but also there was something said that lead me to believe not rabbit, not kangaroo, not snake, not lizard, etc etc that I can not remember.

I do not want to eat any of the above, I am inclined myself to eat vegetarian. I want to know what is correct to teach my children and to tell others if they ask as I am involved in lay-missionary work.

If anyone knows of an Orthodox website that explains this I would appreciate it.

I do not want to ask my Priest because he has been away on pilgrimage for several weeks and isn&#39;t due back just yet and also he is a monk and I am not comfortable asking a monk about meat-eating.

Thanks
in Christ
irene

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Dear Irene,

The only things animal that I could find forbidden in the canons are 1)the blood of any animal; 2)any animal killed by a wild beast or which died a natural death 3)any animal strangled. These canons are found in both the Apostolic Canons & the 5th Ecumenical Council in almost identical form.

The explanation given in the accompanying interpretations is that the blood is that which is or forms an image of the animal's soul which is "consecrated only to God." Further light is shed on the origin of these canons when after stating that Christians abstain from blood & strangled meats there is added in brackets "(and from things sacrificed to idols)". Could it be that this is in fact the origin of these canons?-the strict prohibition against Christians partaking in any manner of what had been offered in pagan sacrifice? If so it could also at least partially explain why it is very rare to hear these rules spoken of nowawadays.

I must say that after 25 of active life in the Church, I have never heard these canons referred to or followed consciously. What the Faithful refrain from eating in terms of meat is more according to taste & hygiene than consciously following a canonical rule. Also I have never heard about any other sort of canonical prohibition concerning types of meat.

In any case it is very important to understand that the basis of our fasting rules is ascetic- it is one aspect of our struggle through self-restraint to attain that glorified life in Christ. I am not saying that your question implies this, but it must be pointed out that the fasting rules are not based on the Judaic idea that some foods are inherently 'impure' while others are 'pure'.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Irene]

Thankyou Father Raphael,

I always respect what you write. I suspect that my beliefs may have been influenced also by what I have read in the Old Testament. Thankyou for giving me a much clearer understanding of this subject.

In Christ
irene

[Charalambos Andrew Geo]

At my uni, there is a substantial amount of muslims and therefore our uni will supply halal, what do they do and in that case can orthodox eat ut, i know God declared all foods clean so in my situation what is best?

in Christ
Charalambos

[Irene]

Dear Charalambos Andrew, I have been thinking about your question for a few days and hoping the knowledgeable people would have time to answer.

In my own opinion:

Any food that we buy whether it is ingredients to take home and make up a meal ourselves or a meal prepared by strangers at a shop, any of these - we can not know for sure the morals and religion of the people involved with that food. We can not know for sure that prayers of another non-christian religion, a pagan religion are not said over the food, during the growing of the food, the cooking.

Therefore all we can do is pray properly at all times before we eat make the sign of the cross on ourselves and over our food. Then our food is blessed in the best way possible without having a Priest bless it.

As for halal:


What Is Halal? from http://www.ifanca.org/halal.htm

Halal is an Arabic word meaning lawful or permitted. The opposite of Halal is haram, which means unlawful or prohibited. Such items are often referred to as Mashbooh, which means doubtful or questionable.

All foods are considered Halal except the following, which are haram:

Swine/pork and its by-products
Animals improperly slaughtered or dead before slaughtering
Animals killed in the name of anyone other than ALLAH &#40;God&#41;
Alcohol and intoxicants
Carnivorous animals, birds of prey and land animals without external ears
Blood and blood by-products
Foods contaminated with any of the above products
Foods containing ingredients such as gelatin, enzymes, emulsifiers, etc. are questionable &#40;Mashbooh&#41; because the origin of these ingredients is not &#40;always&#41; known

[Kris]

At my uni, there is a substantial amount of muslims and therefore our uni will supply halal, what do they do and in that case can orthodox eat ut, i know God declared all foods clean so in my situation what is best?

in Christ
Charalambos

There is nothing wrong with eating Halal meat. Halal butchering follows the same kind of practice as Kosher slaughter; slitting the animals throat with a sharp knife so as to drain the blood.

The only thing particularly Muslim about it is that the butcher will say "bismillah" (In the name of God) as he slaughters the animal, but that's it.

I can't imagine that being any worse than the animal getting killed by an atheist at an abbatoir somewhere.

Also, assuming we were to follow the commandments of the Apostolic Canon and the 5th Ecumenical Council (mentioned above), halal or kosher slaughter seems to be the only way of adequately doing so, since I don't know of any other forms of slaughter where the blood is drained.

Please pray for me, a sinner.

[Kris]

1)the blood of any animal....These canons are found in both the Apostolic Canons & the 5th Ecumenical Council in almost identical form.

Your blessing Father,

I went to this site (http://www.intratext.com/X/ENG0835.HTM) in order to try to find something regarding the 5th Ecumenical Council, but was unable to find the reference to Acts 15:20.

Do you have a more specific reference (or perhaps even a quote?) of where the Council mentions this.

Thank you,

Please pray for me, a sinner.

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Your blessing Father,

I went to this site (http://www.intratext.com/X/ENG0835.HTM) in order to try to find something regarding the 5th Ecumenical Council, but was unable to find the reference to Acts 15:20.

Do you have a more specific reference (or perhaps even a quote?) of where the Council mentions this.

Thank you,

Please pray for me, a sinner.


About this there is Canon LXIII (63) of the Apostles


If any bishop, or presbyter or deacon or anyone else on the sacerdotal list at all, eat meat in the blood of its soul, or that has been killed by a wild beast, or that has died a natural death, let him be deposed. For the Law has forbidden this. But if any layman do the same let him be excommunicated.

Then from Canon LXVII (67) actually from the Quinesext Council there is


Divine Scripture has commanded us to 'abstain from blood, and strangled flesh and fornication' (Gen 9:3-4, Lev 17 & 18:3, Acts 15: 28-29). We therefore suitably penance those who on account of their dainty stomach eat the blood of any animal after they have rendered it eatable by some art. If therefore anyone from now on should attempt to eat the blood of any animal in any way whatsoever, if he be a clergyman, let him be deposed from office; but if he be a layman let him be excommunicated.

I hope this is of some help.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Kris]

Your blessing Father,



I hope this is of some help.


Brilliant! Thank you.

In XC,

Kris

[Irene]

There is nothing wrong with eating Halal meat. Halal butchering follows the same kind of practice as Kosher slaughter; slitting the animals throat with a sharp knife so as to drain the blood.

The only thing particularly Muslim about it is that the butcher will say "bismillah" (In the name of God) as he slaughters the animal, but that's it.

I can't imagine that being any worse than the animal getting killed by an atheist at an abbatoir somewhere.

Also, assuming we were to follow the commandments of the Apostolic Canon and the 5th Ecumenical Council (mentioned above), halal or kosher slaughter seems to be the only way of adequately doing so, since I don't know of any other forms of slaughter where the blood is drained.

Please pray for me, a sinner.


Dear in Christ Kris,

I am sorry but I don't really agree with your statement above, at least the way it reads to me.

If our Christian faith is the truth and if what we are taught is the truth, then the god or gods of other religions are false gods in fact demons. Therefore there can be no difference between an atheist slaughtering meat or preparing food than a Muslim or a person from any other religion. Because "He that is not with me is against me;" (Mt12:30)

However, in writing this message and thinking more about it, I do believe you probably meant something like "that it is ok to eat meat that has been prepared by Muslims as long as we pray and cross ourselves and our food, just like we Orthodox Christians do at all times anyway"

Also, I do understand what you say about the blood. Is that the way our meat is supposed to be prepared as well? I did not realise that we Christians were supposed to eat meat prepared like the Jewish and Islamic people, I guess because we are allowed things such as pork that I thought rules were different for us.

Sorry if I have misread your message.

In Christ
irene

[Kris]

If our Christian faith is the truth and if what we are taught is the truth, then the god or gods of other religions are false gods in fact demons. Therefore there can be no difference between an atheist slaughtering meat or preparing food than a Muslim or a person from any other religion. Because "He that is not with me is against me;" (Mt12:30)


Dear Irene,

I was not in any way trying to legitimise the Islamic religion by what I said. I simply meant that it could hardly be worse to eat food slaughtered by a devout Muslims than that slaughtered by an atheist (or what-ever-else s/he might be) at an abbatoir.

With regards to Muslims worshipping a false god or demon, that depends on how you look at it. Muslims claim to believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, David, Solomon, John the Baptist and Jesus. The problem is that they deny the divinity of Christ, and that they do not believe the One God exists eternally in three coequal and coeternal Persons.

However, in this respect they do not differ in any way from the Jews. Whilst one can criticise the Jewish religion for not believing in the deity of Christ, I would not agree that they worship a demon; they simply have a wrong understanding of God. So unless you believe Jews to be demon-worshippers, one cannot really say the same of Muslims.

In his book The Fount of Knowledge, St. John of Damascus lists Islam among the many heresies, not as a pagan religion.

Also, Catholics and most Protestants understand the Trinity differently from the Orthodox (by including the Filioque, many of the latter being Sabellians). Can we really say that Catholics and Protestants do not worship the True God? Or is it possible to simply say that they have an incorrect understanding of Him?

But, back to the original point, I was not trying to justify Islam in any way with what I said. Much less suggest that anything other than Orthodox Christianity was a valid path.



However, in writing this message and thinking more about it, I do believe you probably meant something like "that it is ok to eat meat that has been prepared by Muslims as long as we pray and cross ourselves and our food, just like we Orthodox Christians do at all times anyway"


That's pretty much it, yes :-)



Also, I do understand what you say about the blood. Is that the way our meat is supposed to be prepared as well? I did not realise that we Christians were supposed to eat meat prepared like the Jewish and Islamic people, I guess because we are allowed things such as pork that I thought rules were different for us.


Well, the canons quoted above calls for excommunication for anyone who eats blood. If one is to take this seriously, halal/kosher slaughter methods, which drain the animal's blood, must be better than other methods, no? I am not saying they're necessary (I think its enough to just make sure your meat is "well-done" when cooked), but if one is to chose one method of slaughter above another, halal/kosher slaughter seems preferable in light of this prohibition of blood consumption.

In XC,
Kris

[Irene]

Dear Kris,


With regards to Muslims worshipping a false god or demon, that depends on how you look at it. Muslims claim to believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, David, Solomon, John the Baptist and - Jesus. The problem is that they deny the divinity of Christ, and that they do not believe the One God exists eternally in three coequal and coeternal Persons.

However, in this respect they do not differ in any way from the Jews. Whilst one can criticise the Jewish religion for not believing in the deity of Christ, I would not agree that they worship a demon; they simply have a wrong understanding of God. So unless you believe Jews to be demon-worshippers, one cannot really say the same of Muslims.



I have believed that if people are not following the correct path, then it must be because of errors in their beliefs caused by the trickery of demons, so, a little bit like a magnet that is drawn to metal, they turn to what they believe is the truth and pray. When the truth is in their path they do not understand and turn away, such as when Jesus Christ was there in front of them and they did not know him. So I, in thinking through all this, came up with the conclusion that they must be worshiping demons (without knowing it).

I understand what you are saying, that people do not actually want to worship demons, that they want to worship the true God they are just being misled.



(I think its enough to just make sure your meat is "well-done" when cooked),


The modern taste seems to be to have meats cooked "rare". (I sometimes wash the meat I buy because I have a huge aversion to seeing the blood maybe I could do this all the time. ).

Thank you for your interesting answer to my post. I have enjoyed the cogs turning in my brain today, some of the rustiness being worn away. I also think upon reflection that my views may have been leading me more into the "draw back in horror - they are worshiping demons" and less into the compassionate "they are being misled" type of mind set.

In Christ
irene

[Elena]

[QUOTE=Orthodox11;36173] assuming we were to follow the commandments of the Apostolic Canon and the 5th Ecumenical Council (mentioned above), halal or kosher slaughter seems to be the only way of adequately doing so, since I don't know of any other forms of slaughter where the blood is drained.
QUOTE]

I was looking for information about the current fast and came accross this thread, and just wanted to add a tiny note that the blood of an animal is always drained in western slaughter practices. The animal is stunned so as to be completely unconcious then hung by a back foot and its throat cut. This allows the blood to drain away. Think of the way carcasses are stored in butchers shops - hanging, this is to encourage as much blood to drain as possible.

The difference between this and Halal/Kosher is that the animal is not stunned first and so is concious when its throat is cut. It will however lose conciousness very quickly as Halal butchers are carefull to cut all the main arteries in the throat and the animal is upright which means that blood flow to the brain is almost immediatly stopped.

Therefore unless you slaughter your own meat and choose not to drain the meat (which I think most of us would find slightly gross, un-hung meat is much more wobbly and apparently smells horrid when it's cooked) we follow the Apostolic Canon and the 5th Ecumenical Council anyway.

In XC,

Elena

[Andreas Moran]

There are many stories of the sympathy saints have for animals. I stopped eating meat some years ago. I think it's better whatever way you look at it. When I drive past a field full of lambs, I cannot think that I would take one, kill it, butcher it, cook it and eat it. If I can't do it, I don't see why I should rely on somebody else to do it. To some extent it's a cultural thing. Father Zacharias disagrees with laymen being vegetarian. Our parish priest in Moscow is delighted we don't eat meat. In the Russian tradition, it is not allowed to eat meat on the day you have Holy Communion. Apologies to the Greeks here, but I cannot accept the idea of roasting lambs and eating them to celebrate Pascha.

[Karena Hryniuk]

This is a very interesting topic. In personal experience the subject of vegetarian or non-vegetarian can get controversial in a big hurry in regards to ethical treatment of animals. For various reasons (including the 'kill it' factor you spoke about Andreas) I was raw vegan/vegan/vegetarian for so long and just recently have added a bit of meat into the diet and am still not sure whether its going to stick.

Fr. Raphael your post is understood, there are also other bits and pieces in the Scriptures that bring attention to styles of eating such as:

Romans 14

The Weak and the Strong

1Accept him whose faith is weak, without passing judgment on disputable matters. 2One man's faith allows him to eat everything, but another man, whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables. 3The man who eats everything must not look down on him who does not, and the man who does not eat everything must not condemn the man who does, for God has accepted him. 4Who are you to judge someone else's servant? To his own master he stands or falls. And he will stand, for the Lord is able to make him stand.

6He who regards one day as special, does so to the Lord. He who eats meat, eats to the Lord, for he gives thanks to God; and he who abstains, does so to the Lord and gives thanks to God.

Its hard to distinguish the rights and wrongs of eating meat. And if there are any at all, with what purpose are they appointed to certain clerical rank? The reason I chose to go back to a bit of meat eating was because as a vegan, when fasting time approached there was no difference at all. Of course, fasting does include other ascetic practices but a sharp change in diet certainly does raise consciousness and heighten spiritual awareness.

Fr. Raphael or any of you who are more knowledgable on this subject maybe you could add a bit more to this?

Do we choose to let the little lamb in the field graze beside his mother or.........not?

ICXC
~Karena

[Herman Blaydoe]

Our Lord tells us in the parable of the Prodigal Son that the father, in his joy, killed the "fatted calf", a young animal set aside for joyous feasts. Animals were sacrificed to God daily in His Temple. Lot sacrificed animals just in case his children had sinned. The Lord commanded His Apostle to eat meat. Our Lord certainly observed the Passover, where it was commanded to eat lamb. Regardless of what PETA wants us to believe, our Lord was not a vegan. He ate fish to prove He was not a ghost. "Ethical" treatment of animals aside, there are reasons to eat and not to eat meat.

The wise words of the Apostle Paul sum it up pretty succinctly, don't you think?

[Fr Raphael Vereshack]

Karena wrote:



Its hard to distinguish the rights and wrongs of eating meat. And if there are any at all, with what purpose are they appointed to certain clerical rank? The reason I chose to go back to a bit of meat eating was because as a vegan, when fasting time approached there was no difference at all. Of course, fasting does include other ascetic practices but a sharp change in diet certainly does raise consciousness and heighten spiritual awareness.

Fr. Raphael or any of you who are more knowledgable on this subject maybe you could add a bit more to this?

Do we choose to let the little lamb in the field graze beside his mother or.........not?

ICXC
~Karena


I can't say what my response would be to a person asking for a blessing to follow the practice of being vegan. I have met those who followed this practice, some of them Orthodox. But none of them were my own parishioners or spiritual children.

I think the advantages of the 'standard' fasting rules lie exactly where you describe them. The fasting rules are meant to be liturgical; ie their rhythm is definitely tied in with the liturgical calendar. There is a liturgical and an appropriate feasting and fasting which is referred to even in the Canons. Personally I would say that it would be important to give consideration so as not to lose a sense of this liturgical rhythm in fasting.

On the other hand being a vegan would not necessarily rule this rhythm out. After all, during Great Lent we practice this varied kind of fasting on weekdays compared to weekends, while still refraining from meat (and dairy) throughout.
As in monasteries one could vary ones diet according to the liturgical season and day while still never eating meat.

The fly in the ointment however is that in monasteries, fish, which is obviously a living, breathing animal, is eaten and usually on festal days. The implication here is that monastics are not, except in rare circumstances, vegetarians in the modern sense.

What then does this mean about the connection between fasting and our understanding that only since the Fall has man eaten animals? I would say that the fasting rules like the other ascetic rules of the Church are first very realistic in terms of our human condition now. They are meant as leading us to a higher level so that we are no longer just fleshly creatures attracted by sensuality & the things of this world. But they also take realistically into account man's present condition of having to live in this material world without portraying this as evil. Here is where the wisdom of the fasting rules are mainly to be found for there is a balance in them which when lived gradually introduces us to the same balanced wisdom.

I would say then that however we put the standard fasting rules into practice it is very important to keep the sense of balance they sum up. Even the most saintly or ascetic monks, who no longer ate any living flesh at all, partook of some consolation at Pascha for example. And of course all of this should be done through the guidance and blessing of a spiritual father.

In Christ- Fr Raphael

[Nina]

There are many stories of the sympathy saints have for animals. I stopped eating meat some years ago. I think it's better whatever way you look at it. When I drive past a field full of lambs, I cannot think that I would take one, kill it, butcher it, cook it and eat it. If I can't do it, I don't see why I should rely on somebody else to do it. To some extent it's a cultural thing. Father Zacharias disagrees with laymen being vegetarian. Our parish priest in Moscow is delighted we don't eat meat. In the Russian tradition, it is not allowed to eat meat on the day you have Holy Communion. Apologies to the Greeks here, but I cannot accept the idea of roasting lambs and eating them to celebrate Pascha.

Giggles... We can be carnivores as long as we keep the fasts of the Church. At least it is permissible by the vision of St. Peter before baptizing Cornelius.

I have a very dear friend (Greek by origin) who was vegan for more than 3 years. We (friends) all tried to persuade and convert him back to "carnivorism" and the best argument was: "How can you enjoy Pascha without all the delicious food and the lamb?!" (because according to us he- a layman - was fasting non-stop and there should be a time to fast and a time to feast)

Please do not misunderstand me. I love animals; when I pass by a field with sheep and lambs I delight at looking at them: the hoping of the lambs has something so divine and joyful in it. You feel like hugging the little lambs playing so pure and innocent (I really think of Christ during those moments). But when at the table with some meat in front of me, I do not really think but make the sign of the Cross and thank God and eat whatever He decided to provide for me. If I start thinking: please trust me that I would not be eating at all (!) because by nature I am sensitive. I love plants very much also and when I water my herbs I tell them how beautiful they look and what joy they give me because God created them for us etc. If I think about it sentimentally it will be very difficult to take the scissors and go cut some mint, or basil, or rosemary.

P.S I can't eat pork meat, not because I feel bad for it because God made Adam and placed him as a ruler of the creation, but because I saw once something gross when they slaughtered a pig. He had worms under his skin.

[Karena Hryniuk]

To some extent it's a cultural thing. Father Zacharias disagrees with laymen being vegetarian. Our parish priest in Moscow is delighted we don't eat meat.

Great Posts and thank you all for the responses.

I guess what I was trying to get at is exactly this. There seems to be differences in advice given by different authorities. When told by my own Spiritual Father 'Yes, It is okay to eat meat..' I did not have the courage to ask ...why?? Whether there is influence by culture, tradition, our fallen mannerism or habit I don't know. But must admit that after going so long without it, eating meat and dairy products now seems almost a luxury. Its part of a rich and festive diet that seems to create the "rhythm" with fasting very well just as you said Fr. Raphael.

After many years of being in this faith I am still learning and this seems to be one more of Gods' wonderful given blessings:)

~Karena

[Eugenia Gotsis]

Greetings everyone,
Can someone help? I know that jelly powder is a derivative of gelatin i.e.animal product.
Here in Greece ( after asking clerics and one of the religious radio stations) they say the church accepts it for
fasting. I've seen offered as dessert during fasting periods. What is the rule for it?

INXC

[Jonathan Michael]

I hope someone will be able to answer you Eugenia, but I just want to return to the opening post a moment. Irene mentioned some meats not to be eaten ever, and included rabbit in that list. I believe, based on other contributions to this thread, that hare - not rabbit - might be considered a prohibited food based on the canons about not eating blood. When a rabbit is killed, it is recommended it is gutted as soon as possible, preferably "in the field" and then left to hang for some hours before it is cooked. If the gutting is not done immediately, then the meat would taste rancid, apparently. With hares the opposite is true - it is usual to neither gut not slit the throat of the animal after it has been killed and leave it hanging in such a way for a few hours - even overnight. This is what I saw in a recepie for "Jugged Hare" once. When the time for cooking comes, the hare is gutted. This would not leave enough time for the animal to be drained of blood, so in this way it would contavene the Apostolic and Ecumenical canons.


I also have a question though, that may add some confusion to what's already been said. I got the impression from somewhere that it was forbidded in canon law for a person, lay or clergy, to abstain from meat for reasons of "abhorrence". Therefore, unless someone is fasting from meat as part of the liturgical cycle, it is wrong for a person to purposely abstain from eating meat. Does anyone know more on this?

I do eat meat, but find myself eating less and less to be truthful. I think that given the food crisises around the world, eating something which takes up comparatively more resources (as opposed to vegetables and crops) is slightly wasteful. I still eat meat with some of my meals, but now it tends to be more of a "side-dish" to add flavour than the main focus of the meal.

[Paul Cowan]

The rule is to keep my eyes on my own plate. If I question whether something is proper or not, I don't serve it to others. I was scolded for bringing cookies one Sunday by an older lady. I told her there was nothing restrictive in them and she backed off. she thought they had eggs in them. they did not.

[Olga]

I hope someone will be able to answer you Eugenia, but I just want to return to the opening post a moment. Irene mentioned some meats not to be eaten ever, and included rabbit in that list. I believe, based on other contributions to this thread, that hare - not rabbit - might be considered a prohibited food based on the canons about not eating blood. When a rabbit is killed, it is recommended it is gutted as soon as possible, preferably "in the field" and then left to hang for some hours before it is cooked. If the gutting is not done immediately, then the meat would taste rancid, apparently. With hares the opposite is true - it is usual to neither gut not slit the throat of the animal after it has been killed and leave it hanging in such a way for a few hours - even overnight. This is what I saw in a recepie for "Jugged Hare" once. When the time for cooking comes, the hare is gutted. This would not leave enough time for the animal to be drained of blood, so in this way it would contavene the Apostolic and Ecumenical canons.

I can think of no animal killed for human consumption which is not "bled" before preparing it for cooking, including rabbit. In my part of the world, there are certain species of fish which are routinely bled as soon they are caught (such as Australian salmon, not to be confused with Atlantic salmon, btw), not because of any biblical concerns, but to ensure the fish is palatable. As a keen fisherman, cook and eater of fish myself, I speak from experience. As for rabbit being "off limits", remember the vision of Apostle Peter and the sheet which came down from heaven bearing all manner of creatures?

As I understand it, the OT prohibitions against "consumption of blood" were a response to the common pagan practice of drinking the blood, or eating raw meat from animals sacrificed to idols. This bears no resemblance to conventional food preparation and consumption practices with which we are familiar.

[Jonathan Michael]

I can think of no animal killed for human consumption which is not "bled" before preparing it for cooking, including rabbit. In my part of the world, there are certain species of fish which are routinely bled as soon they are caught (such as Australian salmon, not to be confused with Atlantic salmon, btw), not because of any biblical concerns, but to ensure the fish is palatable. As a keen fisherman, cook and eater of fish myself, I speak from experience. As for rabbit being "off limits", remember the vision of Apostle Peter and the sheet which came down from heaven bearing all manner of creatures?

Sorry, my post was unclear: rabbits are bled, hares are not. As with most "game" they are hung for many hours specifically so that the blood seeps into the thorax, where it is used in making the sauce. Otherwise the meat would be too dry to be "edible".

Fair point on the Peter's vision, though the canons on not consuming blood do post-date.

[Paul Cowan]

Living where I do there are enough ethnic markets to get just about everything you want excecpt vegemite. rabbits I have seen in the stores here are pure white so they have already been bled as have the chickens. Beef and pork on the other hand still have their blood in them. We cook it out. We don't eat raw meat except perhaps the occassional sushi or sashimi (sp).

Field dressing of animals I think personally me myself and I, should all be bled and then packed in ice or wrapped in netting to protect until you get them back to the main camp where they can be butchered properly. We are not supposed to eat the blood of animals. What is the Scottish dish? haggis (http://www.gumbopages.com/food/scottish/haggis.html)? or blood pudding (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_pudding)? I have had boudin and it is nothing like how they make or compare to these two foods. Eating blood organs is not the same as eating uncooked or unbled blood organs.

Paul

[Andreas Moran]

I asked about this some time ago. Ideally, we should avoid animal-sourced gelatine, and there are vegetarian alternatives anyway.

[Paul Cowan]

I asked about this some time ago. Ideally, we should avoid animal-sourced gelatine, and there are vegetarian alternatives anyway.

I don't know if I would like a celery flavored J-ello. Not that orange flavored tastes like beef.

[M.C. Steenberg]

Very interesting comments from Jonathan about bleeding and hares. This I did not know. Is this widespread custom?

[Andreas Moran]

Widespread or not, it is repulsive.

[Irene]

I watched a documentary recently where English people, who were now living in France, were preparing food the way the local French people taught them. This includes saving the blood and adding it to the pot when making rabbit dishes. Yuck.

There are certain cultures that also eat eggs with the partially developed chick inside. I learnt this because they are for sale here in Australia in some Asian grocery stores and we are told "not for you" and it is explained why.

I have the hardest time eating animal products at all these days and this all puts me off even more.

[Nina]

Not only the French do that. Many cultures around the world save the blood of the animal and use it for sauces etc.

Something that comes to mind is the Blutwurst (Blood sausage) which influenced the 'blood pudding' as the British call it. This food is gross, however we can excuse the people who used it since maybe they did not have much and tried to use everything from the animal. You can read about it here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_pudding).

[Anthony]

What is the Scottish dish? haggis (http://www.gumbopages.com/food/scottish/haggis.html)? or blood pudding (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_pudding)?


There are actually more than two Scottish dishes :). I am particularly looking forward next month to some freshly caught Scottish salmon. Here in Germany I can only get Norwegian salmon. (I hope I am not going to get into trouble here.)

Personally I wouldn't touch either of the "foods" mentioned. But I have heard that when the MacGregors were being hunted by the English, they would carry bags of oatmeal and chopped onions (which were light), and a device for tapping blood from cattle which sympathetizers would leave in their way. All this mixed together would give them the nutrition they needed. Not pretty, but I guess this just echoes Nina's point about hard times.

[Andreas Moran]

It's not 'blood pudding', it's 'black pudding'. It's congealed pig's blood with pieces of pork fat wrapped in pig gut. Appetising, or what?! When I was a child, we had it a lot - it was very cheap. It is still sold. We also have pork scratchings - roasted pig skin. It's the crackling from a roasted joint of pork, and is used as a garnish and as a snack. Only the English could have a snack food which has hair growing out of it!

[Paul Cowan]

Not only the French do that. Many cultures around the world save the blood of the animal and use it for sauces etc.


I never saved the blood for sauces, but I have used the cooked blood that leaches out during the cooking for sauces. Maybe I should not admit to this.

[Herman Blaydoe]

for the upcoming Dormition Fast, guaranteed to put you off your feed for at least two weeks!


I'll never eat meat again (for at least two weeks!) Homer Simpson

[Paul Cowan]

A man, who by way of life did not believe in God or treat His people well, was constantly on the look out for ways to belittle faithful people since they were all so meek and weak or would dessimate religious and Holy things. He was this way his whole life to the point of thinking he was god of his own world and nothing was smarter or stronger than he was.

One day he was walking through the woods not paying attention since nature was nothing more than natural selection of the environs to him. He heard then saw a huge bear was running down the hill towards him obviously with the intent of killing and ripping him to shreads. Just as this huge snarling bear had caught up to him thrown him to the ground and was about to slash away at him with its massive paws, the man yelled out "Oh God".

Instantly, time stopped. Everything was absolutely motionless and frozen in space. The bear was inches from shredding his head when he all of a sudden he heard... Why have you called on my Name? You who persecuted Me your whole life. What would you have Me do for you now?

The man with tears begged God to make the bear Christian. Instantly, time regained. The bear stood up, placed its paws together and prayed; Lord, thank you for this bounty you have placed before me. May it nourish me and keep me strong. Amen.



Sorry, all this talk about us eating animals, brought this to mind.

Paul

[Jonathan Michael]

Very interesting comments from Jonathan about bleeding and hares. This I did not know. Is this widespread custom?

As Nina and Irene said, the saving of the blood is common, and the practice of hanging un-gutted hares is widespread in Nothern Europe, England at least. I checked up on it and it seems I was wildly conservative with the times though: apparently the hare is usually left for up to a week for the best results. Usually a plastic bag is tied around the head to collect any blood that drips from the mouth during that time. There are some people who prefer gutting and draining the hare quickly though, as understandably the flavour of a hare hung for one whole week is, er, pungent. I've never eaten hare myself, but my uncle used to hunt rabbits with his pet lurchers and there would often be a unskinned carcass lying out in the pantry of an evening, ready to be gutted.

My father used to like eating black pudding, sometimes for breakfast and sometimes on a sandwich, but I never liked it myself. Mind you, some years ago - before I was an Orthodox Christian - I did eat a dish in Beijing that consisted of tiny shrimps soaked in vinegar that were still swimming about when delivered to the table and are supposed to be eaten live. No need to tell me that's wrong. Don't worry, I have plenty of these kind of stories if needed for the Dormition Fast!

[Jonathan Hayward]

One random old musing...

As an American Protestant growing up, I thought in terms of Jewish ceremonial law, namely that Jews had rules about permitted foods and we did not: and I was WRONG.

American culture has at least three basic rules:

1: Don't befriend and eat the same kind of animal. Goldfish swallowing exists, but specifically as a way of being perverse. Eating rabbit or raw horsemeat disturbs people. And people are more disturbed at eating pets. (To a Chinese, there may not be any contradiction between keeping one dog as a dear pet and roasting another dog's head for dinner. This breaks more than one rule in American culture, but these rules are not global or universal.)

2: If you eat meat, don't remind yourself where it came from. Hence most meat sold is a slab of something-or-other sandwiched between Saran wrap and Styrofoam. Some hobbyists may fish, but most of us have never seen our meat land animals killed, even once, and it is disgusting to us.

3: Don't land invertebrates; don't eat earthworms or snails (usually), spiders, or scorpions, even though (to those not initiated in Orthodox fasting) seafood, crab, and lobster are a treat and are direct cousins (a lobster and a scorpion are very similar, only one lives on land and the other on sea).

These rules are one legitimate set of cultural rules, but they are not universal nor revealed, and the fact that Orthodox fasting rules allow invertebrates (sea or land) when the fast has not been relaxed even to allow oil and wine suggests that patristic assumptions did not completely line up with these.

Christos Jonathan